SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : I Will Continue to Continue, to Pretend.... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Sully- who wrote (35118)8/18/2010 5:29:39 AM
From: Sully-1 Recommendation  Respond to of 35834
 
"Those Voices Don't Speak For the Rest of Us"

By John
Power Line

The Republican Study Committee made this video, contrasting clips by Ronald Reagan with today's leaders of the Democratic Party. Suffice it to say that Reagan never sounded so timely. It's striking, too, how child-like the Democrats seem compared to him. They're pitiful, but what it really pathetic is that they are in power. As an email correspondent says, it's November or never.

YouTube: "Those Voices Don't Speak for the Rest of Us"

.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)8/24/2010 3:00:28 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Gallup Ignoring Its Own Big Stories

By Bruce Walker
American Thinker

The Gallup Poll is one of the oldest in polling organizations in America. Its reputation ought to be important. The articles which accompany Gallup's polls, however, seem calculated to hide the real story. Consider an article last August, entitled "Political Ideology: 'Conservative' Label Prevails in the South." That is not exactly earth-shattering news. Anyone who has even casual acquaintance with American politics knows that the South is the most conservative part of our country.

The subtitle of the article appears to tell more: "Conservatives outnumber liberals in nearly every state, but not in D.C." That subtitle, in much smaller font below the headline, is, in fact, false. The data which Gallup provides in the actual poll reveals this remarkable fact: conservatives outnumber liberals in every single state of our nation, without exception, including such proverbial bastions of leftism as Massachusetts, Hawaii, Vermont, and Rhode Island. This is electrifying news, particularly in light of the Tea Party movement and the rebellion within the Republican Party against RINOs. Why would Gallup ignore this fascinating news it discovered? Why would Gallup place a subtitle around this poll which is not true and which understates the poll's importance?

Six months later, Gallup announced a poll on the same question: the ideology of respondents in each of the fifty states. What was the title of this article? "Ideology: Three Deep South States Most Conservative," although in much smaller print, the subtitle was "Only District of Columbia has More Liberals than Conservatives." This reconfirms the almost unbelievable results of the August 2009 poll, yet Gallup practicably ignores what its own data shows.

On August 18, 2010, Gallup announced that "Voter Enthusiasm Highest Among Conservatives," but don't try reading the online article. Instead, watch and listen to Frank Newport, Editor in Chief, talking to you about the data but only barely showing it. Why not let visitors see the data instead of listening to Dr. Newport tell us what he thinks the data means (conservatives and liberals are the most enthused voters and moderates the least enthused)? Because -- if you are prepared to stop and start the video clip and look for the faded numbers -- the dramatic difference in ideological enthusiasm makes the title of the poll patently milquetoast. It is almost as if Gallup did not want you examining intellectually its data and wanted you, instead, to watch Newport's bobbing head as he speaks on a busy city sidewalk.

Most curious of all is the poll dated August 17, 2010 with the title "GOP Shows Strongest Positioning Yet in 2010 Test Vote." The four graphs in that article show that since January 2010, Republican support in the generic congressional ballot reached a high water mark in mid-August 2010: interesting, but with polls fluctuating all over the place in the last decade, how important is that polling data really? Surely Gallup did not appear to see much historic about the generic ballot data in August.

But the Gallup Poll released also in August 2010, entitled "Gallup Election 2010 Key Indicators," shows something incomparably more interesting. The tables at the top show that Republicans have a seven-point lead in the generic ballot, and the graph immediately below that -- which inexplicably stretches out a five-month period -- seems to show that the lines of congressional ballot support for the two political parties have almost no trend at all. The bottom graph, which is curiously disconnected from the other graph, shows the generic ballot trends from 1950 to 2006. (Why not extend that to 2010?) That graph shows that, except for a brief period in 1994, when Republicans had a five-point lead for a few weeks, and for a briefer period in 2002, when Republicans had a four-point lead, Democrats have always led in the congressional ballot.

Go to yet another Gallup Poll, this one released on April 13, 2010, and the investigative reader would discover that in those periods not shown in the August 2010 article, Democrats led on the generic congressional ballot from 2006 through 2009 -- which is not particularly surprising. Put these three separate articles together, and a genuinely dramatic fact can be deciphered: in August 2010, the Gallup generic ballot showed Republicans stronger against Democrats than in more than sixty years of tracking this data.

So why is the title to this article not "Republican Lead over Democrats Largest in Polling History"? Or why not "Democrat Generic Ballot Weakest in Sixty Years"? Why, since Gallup reports all this data in scattered reports and must have all the figures together in a single database, did someone at Gallup not play with a spreadsheet, push a button, and then say, "Wow! Look at this, guys! Republicans are in the best position on the congressional ballot than they have ever been! What a story!" We all know why, don't we?


Bruce Walker is the author of a new book: Poor Lenin's Almanac: Perverse Leftists Proverbs for Modern Life.

.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)9/17/2010 4:38:56 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
In Delaware, GOP should target Dems, not O'Donnell

By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
September 17, 2010

Imagine for a moment that Republicans were not consumed with the various faults of the party's newly chosen Delaware Senate candidate, Christine O'Donnell. What would GOP operatives, both in Delaware and in Washington, be doing right now? They'd be attacking the record of O'Donnell's Democratic opponent, Chris Coons. As it turns out, there's plenty to attack, if Republicans ever get around to it.

GOP officials, both local and national, have long been preparing for a run against Coons. Until very recently they thought their candidate would be Mike Castle. But in any event, they knew their opponent, and the same issues that would have been effective for Castle against Coons could be effective for O'Donnell.

Coons, 47, is the top executive of New Castle County, home to a majority of Delaware's population. From a Republican perspective, there's one really important thing to know about his time in office: In 2004, when Coons first ran for the job, he promised not to raise taxes. Since then he has raised taxes not once, not twice, but three times.

Coons inherited a surplus. Celebrating victory on election night in 2004, he said his "top priority would be to continue balancing the budget without increasing property taxes," according to an account in the local News Journal. Yet in 2006, he pushed through a 5 percent increase in property taxes. In 2007, he raised property taxes 17.5 percent. In 2009, he raised them another 25 percent.

Coons wanted to raise other taxes, too. He proposed a hotel tax, a tax on paramedic services, even a tax on people who call 911 from cell phones.

Coons says the increases were necessary because New Castle County, despite its surplus, was saddled with extravagant spending obligations made by his predecessor. "Chris made really tough decisions, and after bringing folks together was able to say that we have to have some level of shared sacrifice if we want to get the county back on track," says Coons spokesman Daniel McElhatton. "He was able to restore New Castle County to fiscal responsibility."

Well, not exactly. In January 2009, Coons warned the county might be headed for bankruptcy.

A few months ago, preparing for the expected race against Castle, Coons sought to pre-empt the tax issue with a frank acknowledgement. "Chris Coons raised your taxes," he said in an interview with Politico. "Absolutely. Guilty as charged, your honor." Coons argued that he had also cut spending by historic amounts to keep the county solvent.

Now, on his campaign Web site, Coons expresses deep concern about the federal government's "runaway debt." A number of his proposals to cut the deficit involve collecting more taxes.

Add to that the likelihood that Coons will be a strong ally of the Democratic leadership in new spending proposals. He has supported all the big ones -- stimulus, bailouts, Obamacare -- and on Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Coons is his favorite Senate candidate. "He's my pet," Reid told the Hill newspaper. (A chagrined McElhatton was reduced to protesting that "Chris is not anyone's pet.")

Put it all together, and could central casting have come up with a better Democrat for a Republican to run against? "We believe that Chris Coons, with his record of raising taxes, has shown throughout his career that he would rather take orders and directives from Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid than do what is right for Delaware and the country," says state GOP spokesman Thomas Doheny.

Some Republicans argue that O'Donnell, given her own tax lien from 2005, can't make that argument. Maybe not. But it's just as likely she will receive some sympathy for her problems with the IRS -- she says she did nothing wrong -- and besides, Delaware voters might well care more about their own taxes than Christine O'Donnell's.

At the moment, though, top Republicans are still beside themselves over O'Donnell's primary win. On Thursday, Delaware state GOP chairman Tom Ross, an O'Donnell foe, pledged support for "our candidates" but couldn't bring himself to mention O'Donnell's name. National party officials are scrambling to back down from their initial snub of her. Meanwhile, a new Rasmussen poll shows O'Donnell 11 points behind Coons -- a significant margin, but not insurmountable.

Can party officials put aside their unhappiness and campaign hard for their elected nominee? Even in Delaware, there has probably never been a better year for a flawed candidate on the right side of the issues. Why not try to win?

Byron York, The Examiner's chief political correspondent, can be contacted at byork@washingtonexaminer.com. His column appears on Tuesday and Friday, and his stories and blogposts appear on ExaminerPolitics.com.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: washingtonexaminer.com

.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)9/17/2010 5:09:51 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
The Rout Is On.

By Jim Geraghty
The Campaign Spot
September 17, 2010 9:56 A.M.

Campaigns hate it when I suggest they have their races won, so let’s include all the traditional caveats. In a New York minute, everything can change; every candidate is one gaffe away from self-destruction, October surprises may abound, the only poll that matters is the one on Election Day, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

At this point, the story of the election is the number of statewide races that were supposed to be competitive that aren’t. This morning’s poll in Ohio suggests that Ohio’s Senate race isn’t going to be all that competitive, and neither is the governor’s race. In Pennsylvania, Patrick Toomey leads by a bunch and Tom Corbett leads by a bunch more. Democrats will not be able to translate the Mark Sanford scandal into any serious traction in South Carolina’s governor’s race, and in that state’s Senate race . . . well, you know.

Michigan will not have a competitive governor’s race. There was a lot of talk that Democrat Bill White was capable of making the Texas governor’s race competitive, but so far he trails by a significant margin, except for the occasional outlying poll. Barring some dramatic change, Democrat Rory Reid will not make a serious run at Nevada’s governorship. In Tennessee, Republicans will win the governor’s mansion. In one of the great under-the-radar races of this cycle, Republican Paul LePage is a strong favorite to be the next governor of Maine. You can almost put Wisconsin in this pile, too.

The Missouri Senate race, once considered one of the perfect bellwethers, is looking increasingly like a Roy Blunt rout. The Florida Senate race looks much less competitive, now that Marco Rubio is up on the airwaves and kicking it into a higher gear. The Arkansas Senate race is probably going to be an embarrassment for Democrat Blanche Lincoln. We’ve known for a while now that the Senate races in North Dakota and Indiana would be solid GOP wins, and the challengers to GOP incumbents in Louisiana and North Carolina are not making any serious progress.

These are all statewide races that the Democrats could reasonably have hoped would be competitive at the beginning of the year. For their party, all of this paints a picture darker than Rembrandt’s Night Watch; if they’re losing the statewide races by a bunch, that helps GOP challengers in the House races lower on the ticket.

So Democrats can rejoice that they have a better chance in Delaware now, or that the Colorado gubernatorial race has broken their way, or that Mark Kirk isn’t roaring ahead of Alexi Giannoulias in Illinois. But they’re fooling themselves if they think it means that much in the big picture.

Every party leaves races on the table, even in their best years. In 1994, Democratic senator Chuck Robb hung on against Ollie North, and Sen. Diane Feinstein beat Michael Huffington by only 2 percentage points. In Maryland, Democrat Parris Glendening won the governor’s race by the skin of his teeth after viciously nasty attacks against Ellen Sauerbrey.

.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)9/17/2010 6:52:39 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Fox News Poll: Wide GOP Lead Among Interested Voters; Obama Job Approval Hits New Low

By Dana Blanton
FoxNews.com
Published September 17, 2010

With less than 50 days until Election Day, American voters favor Republicans over Democrats by a six percentage-point margin, and that advantage widens among those voters most interested in the election. After the economy, the next most important issue to voters is the trustworthiness of candidates.

Meanwhile, President Obama’s job rating has hit a new low.


These are some of the findings of a Fox News poll released Friday.

When asked who they would back if voting in the Congressional election today, 46 percent of voters say the Republican candidate in their district and 40 percent the Democrat. Two weeks ago the GOP lead was 46-37 percent (1-2 Sept 2010). And when the results are narrowed to voters who say they are certain they will vote in November, that gap widens to 9 points.

The Republican advantage expands to 20 points when looking only at results among voters who say they are extremely or very interested in the election -- a group that includes more Republicans (75 percent extremely/very interested) than Democrats (50 percent extremely/very interested).

More Republicans (91 percent) than Democrats (85 percent) say they plan to vote for their party’s candidate. The vote among independents is split evenly between the parties (30 percent each). Voters who consider themselves part of the Tea Party movement (21 percent in this poll) are more likely to vote Republican by a 63-point margin.

By a spread of 47-43 percent, more voters say it would be “good for the country” if all the current members of Congress were booted (including their own representative) and all new people were elected. That includes 59 percent of Republicans, 45 percent of independents and 36 percent of Democrats.

Two-thirds don’t think elected officials in Washington can relate to the lives of everyday Americans, and 80 percent think the United States is seen as weaker today in the eyes of the world compared to a few years ago.

Who should hold the gavel in the next session of Congress? Thirty-seven percent want Democrat Nancy Pelosi to keep her job as House Speaker. A larger number though -- 47 percent -- would rather see a Republican take over as leader. While 77 percent of Democrats want Pelosi to stay as speaker, some 9 percent would prefer a Republican and another 9 percent would prefer a different Democrat.

President’s Approval Hits New Low

President Obama’s job approval hit a new low this week. Overall, 42 percent of voters approve of the job he is doing, down from 46 percent earlier in September, and 52 percent disapprove. Compare that to his 54 percent approval rating a year ago (15-16 Sept. 2009), and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s current 66 percent approval rating.

Even fewer voters -- 40 percent -- approve of the job Obama is doing on the economy, and 56 percent disapprove.

In addition, the largest number -- 43 percent -- thinks Obama is spending too little time on the economy. However, nearly as many -- 41 percent -- say he’s spending the right amount of time.

A sizable 70 percent majority feels nervous about the economy compared to 24 percent who feel confident. Meanwhile, a 38 percent plurality of voters says they are “working harder and earning less.” That’s more than triple the 12 percent who are “working harder and earning more.” Some 37 percent are working harder and earning the same.

Sixty-one percent are optimistic about the future of the country. That’s down from 77 percent who felt that way when Obama took office (January 2009).

Even so, 78 percent feel at least somewhat confident about their personal financial future, including 30 percent who are “very” confident. That’s a slight improvement from when Obama took office. In January 2009, 74 percent were confident about their financial future (24 percent “very” confident).

The Obama administration frequently blames former President George W. Bush for the way things are going in the country. So far, Bush hasn’t responded. The poll found voters approve of Bush’s restraint. Sixty-two percent have more respect for him for keeping quiet, while 25 percent would have more respect if he responded.

The Fox News Poll involved telephone interviews with 900 randomly chosen registered voters and was conducted by Opinion Dynamics Corp. from September 14 - September 16. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points for the total sample.

Click here to see full poll results (pdf).

Trustworthiness Rivals Economy as Top Issue
The economy remains the top issue to voters this year, as 57 percent say it will be “extremely” important in their decision. What’s the second most important issue? Trustworthiness of candidates takes that spot -- 53 percent say it will be “extremely” important to their vote.

Forty-eight percent say government spending and 46 percent say health care will be “extremely” important to their vote for Congress this year, followed by the federal deficit (43 percent), taxes (43 percent), terrorism (41 percent), immigration (32 percent) and Afghanistan (27 percent).

Republicans have an 11 percentage-point advantage among voters who say the economy is "extremely” important to their vote for Congress. For those say the same about the trustworthiness of candidates, Republicans have an 18-point edge. The GOP has a 29-point edge among voters saying the issue of taxes will be “extremely” important.

For those who say health care is “extremely” important, Republicans holds a 12-point edge. That said, voters are fairly evenly split over repealing the new health care law -- 44 percent want it repealed, while 43 percent want it to stay in place.

More than 7 of 10 Republicans (71 percent) favor repealing the health care law. A majority of Democrats (67 percent) and a plurality of independents (45 percent) oppose repealing it.
When asked what makes them more upset, more voters say that the bill became law at all (47 percent) than say they are upset the law doesn’t do more (36 percent).

More than twice as many voters think the national debt (59 percent) is the greater threat to the country’s future than terrorism (24 percent). Still, that’s a smaller spread than six months ago when almost three times as many said the debt was the greater threat (65-23 percent, March 2010).

Democrats do best among voters who say Afghanistan will be “extremely” important to their vote, yet still trailing Republicans on this issue by 4 points.

Tax Cuts
Overall, when voters are asked about the Bush tax cuts, by more than two-to-one voters say they should continue (63 - 26 percent).

Going a step further, 40 percent think the tax cuts should continue for everyone, compared to 44 percent who agree they should remain only on income below $250,000. Ten percent would let them expire altogether.

Likewise, views are evenly split over whether there should be a tax increase on “high-income earners” -- 48 percent support an increase and 47 percent are opposed.

A majority of Republicans (61 percent) think the Bush tax cuts should continue for everyone. Majorities of Democrats (57 percent) and independents (55 percent) say they should continue only on income below $250,000.

Those with annual household incomes $100,000 or higher are more likely to say the tax cuts should continue for everyone by a slim 42-40 percent margin. By comparison, those with incomes $50,000 or below are more likely to think the tax cuts should continue just for the middle class by a 44-38 percent margin.

Few people put themselves in the “rich” category. Just 5 percent consider themselves part of the upper class. Half identify as middle class (50 percent), while 37 percent identify as working class and 8 percent lower class.

.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)9/21/2010 11:57:38 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
The rules have changed: Independents strongly trending to GOP

By: Mark Tapscott
Editorial Page Editor
09/20/10 8:05 AM EDT

Douglas Schoen and Heather R. Higgins are in today's Wall Street Journal with massive new evidence that the center has shifted fundamentally to the Right as independents are going strongly Republican.

"Today, independents say they lean more toward the Republican Party than the Democratic Party, 50% to 25%, and that the Republican Party is closer to their views by 52% to 30%. This movement comes in spite of independents' generally negative views of the GOP—a majority of independents (54%) view the Republicans unfavorably, compared to 39% who have a favorable impression," Schoen and Higgins said.

And, they add, "the poll also revealed that 48% of independents were either 'sympathetic to or supporters of the tea party.'"

What independents want the GOP to do is essentially what it has for decades promised to do but rarely delivered when in power:

"More generally, independents made clear in the survey what they want candidates to do: Decrease the size and scope of government, cut spending and taxes, balance the budget, reduce the federal debt, reduce the power of special interests and unions, repeal and replace the health-care legislation, and decrease partisanship," Schoen and Higgins said.

"The survey also showed that independents believe they aren't getting any of this from the current representatives in Washington," they added.

Lest Republicans start thinking all they have to do between now and election day is run out the clock and make no mistakes, Schoen and Higgins include this crucially important warning:

"While the current numbers look promising for Republicans, the GOP should recognize that these voters remain up for grabs," Schoen and Higgins said.

"If Republicans fail to convince voters that they are committed to scaling back government and cutting taxes and spending, these independents may become so disgusted that they simply stay home rather than vote," they warned.

Hopefully the WSJ folks will put this important oped outside their firewall, so that non-subscribers can read it. The oped is here.

This campaign is beginning to feel a bit like the seventh inning of a baseball game in which the pitcher has tossed a no-hitter, but nobody wants to say anything about that fact for fear of jinxing him.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: washingtonexaminer.com



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)9/21/2010 1:55:34 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Rasmussen: Miller up double digits over Murkowski, Democrat in Alaskan senate race

By: Mark Hemingway
Commentary Staff Writer
09/21/10 11:14 AM EDT

Well, well, well -- it looks as if Murkowski's write in bid appears to be hurting the Democrat in the race more than Joe Miller:

<<< Republican Joe Miller attracts 42% of the vote in the first Rasmussen Reports poll of the Alaska Senate race since GOP Senator Lisa Murkowski announced her write-in campaign to try to keep her job.

The telephone survey of Likely Voters in Alaska shows Murkowski picking up 27% of the vote and Democrat Scott McAdams earning 25%. One percent (1%) say they’d prefer some other candidate, and five percent (5%) are undecided.

This race now moves from Leans GOP to Solid GOP in the Rasmussen Reports Election 2010 Senate Balance of Power rankings. >>>

Still "hearing the call" from Alaskan voters, Senator Murkowski? In other news, Murkowski just pulled an ad last night that misspelled her name -- which is not something you want to do when you're running as a write-in:



And in case you're wondering, someone is already making good use of LisaMurkwski.com.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: washingtonexaminer.com



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)9/22/2010 11:19:20 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Pelosi: Six weeks from today we will have a great Democratic victory

By: David Freddoso
Online Opinion Editor
09/22/10 10:20 AM EDT

Is Pelosi ready to step down as Speaker of the House should the Republicans dominate in November? Not a chance.

Here is what she said to NPR’s Robert Siegel when asked about the election.

<<< PELOSI: First of all , I don’t accept that premise in any way shape or form. The momentum is with us. We are out there to dispel many of the misrepresentations that have been going out there for nearly two years by the Republicans and the special interests, the oil industry, the health insurance industry, the banks and their allies.

We’re out there. Our members are great articulate spokespersons for their point of view into their districts. And district by district we feel very confident about the election.

And we believe that six weeks from today, six weeks from Wednesday of this week we will have no regrets but instead we will have a great Democratic victory. >>>

Read more at the Washington Examiner: washingtonexaminer.com



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)9/22/2010 11:33:38 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
In New York, GOP's Paladino Trails Cuomo By Only 6? Only 6?!?

In Pat Toomey
Jim Geraghty
The Campaign Spo

Two shockers from Quinnipiac this morning, each one making the other a wee bit suspect.

In Pennsylvania:

<<< Republican Pat Toomey has hit the magic 50 percent mark as he leads Democratic U.S. Rep. Joe Sestak 50 – 43 percent in the race for Pennsylvania’s U.S. Senate seat, according to a Quinnipiac University poll of likely voters released today.

Pennsylvania likely voters disapprove 56 – 40 percent of the job President Barack Obama is doing, the independent Quinnipiac University survey, conducted by live interviewers, finds. This first general election survey of Pennsylvania likely voters in this election cycle cannot be compared to earlier surveys of registered voters. >>>

I'm sure Team Toomey will take it, but a seven point margin is actually one of the better ones Sestak has seen lately.

But here's the holy-smokes-can-this-be-real one:

<<< Republican Carl Paladino, aided by a 4 -1 margin among Tea Partiers, trails New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, the Democratic candidate for Governor, 49 – 43 percent among likely voters, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

Only 18 percent of New York State likely voters consider themselves part of the Tea Party movement, but they back Paladino 77 – 18 percent.

Cuomo leads 87 – 8 percent among Democrats while Paladino leads 83 – 13 percent among Republicans and 49 – 43 percent among independent voters, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University survey, conducted by live interviewers, finds. This first likely voter general election survey in New York in this election cycle can not be compared with earlier surveys of registered voters. >>>

I've been lamenting for weeks that a bunch of strong GOP House candidates in New York were going to be hurt by the lack of top-of-the-ticket help or even a competitive statewide race among the big three, the governor's race and the two Senate races. Well, Paladino, who's pledging to clean up Albany with a baseball bat, looks like he's in a competitive race.



.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)9/29/2010 8:52:56 AM
From: Sully-2 Recommendations  Respond to of 35834
 
Dems Take a Stand on ObamaCare



Chip Bok from Creators Syndicate

creators.com



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)9/30/2010 5:58:37 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Dems Retreat to Coast as GOP Rules Vast Interior

Michael Barone

Here's an exercise for some evening when you're curious about big nationwide trends in this year's elections.

Get an outline map showing the 50 states, and take a look at the latest poll averages in pollster.com in each race for senator and governor. Color in the percentage (rounded off; no need for tenths) by which either the Republican or Democratic candidate is leading (I use blue for Republicans, red for Democrats) in each state.

The results are revealing, even breathtaking.

The map of the Senate races shows Republicans leading over almost all the landmass of America. Democrats are ahead in the three West Coast states and Hawaii (though not by much in California and Washington) and by 1 point in Nevada. They're also ahead in four states along the Atlantic Coast — Maryland, Delaware, New York, Connecticut — plus Vermont.

Republicans lead in all the other Senate races, from Philadelphia to Phoenix and Boca Raton to Boise. True, their candidate leads by only 1 point in Barack Obama's home state of Illinois. And they've got narrow leads in some mountain states (West Virginia, Colorado, Kentucky).

The map of governors' races is not much different.
Democrats lead in New York, all the New England states except Maine, plus Maryland. They lead in Arkansas, where they've got a popular one-term incumbent, and in Colorado, where the party's nominee has severe resume flaws and former Republican Rep. Tom Tancredo is running as an independent. Democrats lead in Hawaii and Minnesota, normally Democratic states where Republicans have held the governorship for the last two years.

Two other big states have close races: In California, Republican Meg Whitman barely leads septuagenarian Democrat Jerry Brown, and in Florida, the race is tied.

But overall, Republicans are doing very well indeed, with statistically significant leads in every other state with a governor contest this year.

It would be more difficult to draw a map showing the party margins in the 435 House districts. For one thing, there are no publicly available polls in many districts. But if you could draw such a map, I think you'd see Democrats holding onto districts dominated by their core constituencies (blacks, Hispanics and the affluent voters Joel Kotkin calls gentry liberals) and struggling just about everywhere else, from factory towns to high-income suburbs.

Taken together, all these maps show a Democratic Party shrinking back to its bicoastal base and a Republican Party spreading to take in most of the vast expanse of the continent.

Now the geography can be a little misleading. The Democrats' Northeast and Pacific Coast bases are heavily populated, and the states where they're leading in Senate races cast 136 electoral votes in 2008. But the states where Republicans are leading cast 274.

These 2010 maps are quite a contrast with the maps you might have drawn just after the 2008 election.

Then, liberal pundits especially, but also more neutral commentators, were arguing that the Republican Party had receded to its base — most of the South, all of the Great Plains and some of the Rocky Mountains. The Democrats were expanding to the New South (Virginia and North Carolina), the old Midwest (Indiana) and the Rocky Mountains (Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada).

Extrapolating from the 2008 election results, some Democrats foresaw a 40-year period of Democratic dominance. It turned out to last about 40 weeks, as Republicans passed Democrats in polls on the popular vote for the House in August 2009.

Now we see Obama campaigning at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, in Dane County, where he won 73 percent of the vote in 2008, chiding students for their apparent apathy. After reportedly planning to skip the rally, as he did when Obama visited Wisconsin on Labor Day, Sen. Russ Feingold made a last-minute appearance.

Republicans shouldn't get too giddy. The election has not been held yet (though early voting has begun in a few states), and Obama may indeed whip up some enthusiasm in the Democratic base. Republican candidates' flaws may prove fatal in some states and districts.

Moreover, as the political turnaround of the last 22 months has shown, voters stand ready to punish a party that passes bills they hate or fails to stay true to stands they love.

But for the moment anyway, the vast expanse of America is hospitable to Republicans, while Democrats seem appreciated only in their coastal and campus redoubts.

Michael Barone, senior political analyst for The Washington Examiner (www.washingtonexaminer.com), is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a Fox News Channel contributor and a co-author of The Almanac of American Politics. To find out more about Michael Barone, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2010 THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)10/1/2010 3:46:08 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Broder: There are only so many liberals

By: David Freddoso
Online Opinion Editor
09/30/10 1:25 PM EDT

David Broder has a very interesting piece in today’s Washington Post looking at the national ideological realignment of the early Obama era, and how it affects Democrats’ chances:

<<< Sometimes the most important clues are hiding in plain view. That was the case in late June, when the Gallup Organization reported that the share of voters who describe themselves as conservative had increased from 37 percent to 42 percent in the past two years…[I]t was the highest percentage for conservatives in any such poll since Gallup started asking this question in 1992. The five-point gain came equally from the ranks of moderates and liberals, who fell to 35 percent and 20 percent, respectively. >>>

Broder writes that this means President Obama’s appeals to his liberal base may not as useful as they once were. You can charge up your 20 percent base as much as you like, but if your opponent’s base is twice as large, that’s a tough one, even if you’re not losing moderates the way Obama probably is.

<<< Suppose Democratic candidates run as well as Obama did nationally in 2008, taking 20 percent of the conservatives, 60 percent of the moderates and 89 percent of the liberals. And suppose, too, that turnout rates are the same for all three groups.

With the updated Gallup figures, a 2010 Democratic candidate who matched Obama’s national percentages would win Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Oregon and Washington. But, with more conservatives and fewer liberals in the mix, the Democrat would come up short in 13 other competitive states and barely break even in California, Illinois and New Hampshire. Among the big states where the numbers break against the Democrats are Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania….[I]f Gallup is right, and I believe its methodology is solid, there simply are fewer liberal votes to be won this time. >>>

Remember — the assumption here is that our hypothetical Democratic candidates do as well as Obama did. In most places, that’s just not going to happen this year. It’s one more highly interesting way of looking at why the Democrats are in trouble.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: washingtonexaminer.com



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)10/1/2010 7:29:02 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Is It Too Early to Call a Race?

By Jim Geraghty
The Campaign Spot
October 1, 2010 12:07 A.M.

The DSCC cancels their advertising buys in Kentucky that would have helped their man Jack Conway against the GOP’s Rand Paul.

Of course, it’s not over until it’s over, etcetera, etcetera.

But let’s face it. If the DSCC doesn’t see much point in advertising, then it means they don’t put much stock in that poll that had Paul up by 2. And if that one’s an outlier, then the other ones putting Paul up 7 to 15 offer a more realistic look at the electorate.

So shortly after midnight, October 1, the Campaign Spot Decision Desk can now project Republican Rand Paul the winner of the Kentucky Senate race.

I exaggerate. Slightly.

.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)10/1/2010 7:31:59 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
‘Alan Grayson: He’s a National Embarrassment.’

By Jim Geraghty

September 30, 2010 10:22 P.M.
The Campaign Spot
The NRCC hits the airwaves in Orlando:

YouTube: Alan Grayson: He’s a national embarrassment

What a wonderful closing line: “Alan Grayson: He’s a national embarrassment.”

.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)10/13/2010 10:43:08 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Polls tip GOP’s way in Nev., Ohio, Wash.

By: David Freddoso
Online Opinion Editor
10/12/10 10:00 AM EDT

A new round of Fox News polls confirms what other surveys have said about two Senate races where Democrats once seemed to be turning a corner. Republican Sharron Angle holds a very slim two-point lead over Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. And Dino Rossi, R, tops Sen. Patty Murray, D, boy one point.

In both cases, the polling is within the margin of error, both polls show Republican challengers are very much in it and can win. And provided things go well elsewhere, victories in Washington and Nevada could create a GOP Senate majority.

Meanwhile, one more small piece of bad news for the DSCC:

<<< The Pennsylvania State Troopers Association is poised to announce that it has endorsed the Republican running for U.S. Senate in Pennsylvania.

Republican candidate Pat Toomey planned to appear Tuesday morning at the union’s Harrisburg-area headquarters for the event. >>>

Meanwhile, unsurprisingly, Christine O’Donnell is not competitive in Delaware.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: washingtonexaminer.com



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)10/13/2010 11:44:17 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
News for House Dems: ‘Worse, worser, and worst’

By: David Freddoso
Online Opinion Editor
10/13/10 10:20 AM EDT

The news this morning for Democrats? To take a page from Keith Olbermann’s book, it’s “Worse, Worser and Worst.”

WORSE: Kristi Noem, the Republican challenger Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, D-S.D., raised $1 million in the quarter that just ended. Not only does this mean that Republicans might have a new Sarah Palin who isn’t a knucklehead, but it also means they’ll probably outspend Herseth-Sandlin until Election Day.

WORSER: The Hill has released polls of ten open House districts (One of them isn’t actually “open,” but it was just recently filled in a special election). A few takeaways:

* Democrats are getting killed in AR-1, the district of retiring Rep. Marion Berry, D.

* Despite heavy spending by the DCCC, they appear doomed in WI-7, retiring Democratic Rep. David Obey’s Wisconsin as well. Republican Sean Duffy leads by 9 points.

* They are getting killed in Davy Crockett’s old district, TN-8 (open, Tanner).

* Democrats are doing much better in IL-10, Mark Kirk’s district, than anyone seems to think. On the other hand, they look set to lose in HI-1, one of their expected pickups, as Rep. Charles Djou, R, has posted a surprising four-point lead and both candidates have plenty of name recognition.

* Democrats hold a slim 42-39 lead, with lots of undecideds, in WV-1, where Democrat Mike Oliverio and Republican David McKinley are fighting over who is more conservative. It’s a dogfight, but here’s one ominous cross-tab: Independent voters are breaking for the Republican, three to one.

* Republicans lead, although more narrowly than you might expect, in the open WA-3, PA-7, NH-2 and MI-1 seats.

WORST: If you’ve been waiting for the dam to break, here’s a hint about how it’s going to happen.

<<< An alliance of Republican groups is launching a $50 million advertising blitz this week in a final push to help the GOP win a majority in the House, representing the biggest spending blitz ever by such groups in a congressional election campaign…It is aimed at the few dozen competitive races where Democratic candidates have significantly more money in the bank than their Republican opponents, eating into one of the Democrats’ last financial advantages…

In the 40 races deemed toss-ups by the Cook Political Report, a political handicapper, Democratic candidates had a combined $39.3 million of cash on hand as of June 30, the most-recent filing deadline. Republican candidates had $16.5 million in the bank. >>>

This effort — led by American Crossroads, Crossroads GPS, American Action Network, and the Commission on Hope, Growth and Opportunity, could put a lot more races on the map. Think, for example, of MI-3, where Democratic Rep. Gary Peters is poll-poor but cash rich. Or Joe Donnelly, D, in IN-2. Or Sanford Bishop, D, in Georgia. Or Melissa Bean, D, in IL-8. Or Ed Perlmutter, D, in Colorado. Or Tim Waltz, D, in Minnesota. Or any of the House races in Connecticut or Washington State that haven’t been getting much attention lately.

Sure, there will be plenty of new whining about undisclosed donors, but unions — which only have to disclose large donations (over $5,000), and need do so only annually, months after the election is over — have been bringing hundred-million-dollar political slush funds to the table for years on behalf of Democrats, leaving the GOP at a structural disadvantage. We could all do with more disclosure by everyone, but the Democrats’ problem is that the playing field is level and the electorate doesn’t need much of a push to throw them out of power.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: washingtonexaminer.com



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)10/13/2010 11:47:34 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Poll: 4 in 10 Obama Backers No Longer Support Him

By Mark Noonan on Loser Watch

From Bloomberg:

<<< Hope has turned to doubt and disenchantment for almost half of President Barack Obama’s supporters.

More than 4 of 10 likely voters who say they once considered themselves Obama backers now are either less supportive or say they no longer support him at all, according to a Bloomberg National Poll conducted Oct. 7-10… >>>

Obama and his Democrats are counting on fire up his supporters to stem the tide of defeat on November 2nd – this poll indicates their efforts might not bear much fruit.

As I’ve said before, Obama won because he was the “Un-Named Democrat” in the flesh. You might recall that for years an “Un-Named Democrat” always polled better than this or that specific Republican in Presidential polling. The reason for this, in my view, is that people could place their finest ideals on an unknown person and prefer that to the all too fallible reality of a particular Republican. Once, however, people had to choose between an actual Democrat and an actual Republican, things changed. Obama swept in to American politics with hardly anyone taking a really long, hard look at him…and as he was a blank canvass, and wasn’t what we had at the moment, people could think what they would of him.

And they loved it. He was Hope and Change; he was the man who would, at long last, bring an end to politics as usual and heal our divides. The only trouble was that Obama wasn’t a blank canvass – he was, and is, a very real man…and his reality is as a hard left ideologue.

As a hard left ideologue, Obama is a mish-mash of ignorance, bigotry and crack-brained schemes. Once in office, all of this came to the fore because Obama was unequipped to do anything else. Being what he is, he could not do other than increase the divisions between us; could not do other than advance the cause of liberal special interests; could not do other than advance liberal economic and social policies rejected by the broad majority of the electorate. As this all came out, people became disillusioned – and now its showing in polls.

I don’t think he’ll be able to get that back – not now, and not in 2012. Even if the economy improves, I think that Obama has built up a reservoir of distrust which he will not be able to overcome. He said – or, more accurately, had said about him – things which were not true of himself or his plans. People feel betrayed – feel that they were conned in to backing someone they would not otherwise have supported.

We’ll see how all this works out, but this decision on the part of Democrats to force Obama through the primaries and bamboozle the American majority in to backing him will, I think, prove the most self-destructive act in liberalism’s history.



.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)10/15/2010 4:27:05 AM
From: Sully-1 Recommendation  Respond to of 35834
 
Gallup: ‘Record’ percentages of Americans think government is too big and intrusive

By: Mark Hemingway
Commentary Staff Writer
10/13/10 2:25 PM EDT

How is the Tea Party shaping political debate? Gallup reports opposition to big government has grown significantly in the last year:

<<< Record- or near-record-high percentages of Americans are critical of the size and scope of government, as measured by four Gallup trend questions updated in September. This sentiment stretches to 59% of Americans now believing the federal government has too much power, up eight percentage points from a year ago.

Nearly as many Americans also give the antigovernment response to a question asking whether government should do more to solve the country’s problems or whether it is doing too many things that should be left to businesses and individuals. Today’s 58% saying it is doing too much is just slightly below the 59% to 60% levels recorded in the mid- to late ’90s. >>>

Read more at the Washington Examiner: washingtonexaminer.com



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)10/15/2010 4:31:33 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Pa. Democrats: Coming back, or on the verge of collapse? (Updated)

By: David Freddoso
Online Opinion Editor
10/14/10 10:35 AM EDT

Yesterday afternoon, the DSCC released a poll showing Rep. Joe Sestak, D, leading Pat Toomey, R, in Pennsylvania’s Senate race. Naturally, I considered the source, but you have to wonder when you see a poll like that: Has something happened to change the race? Could it be that the next independent polls will show a shift — from the 5-9 point lead Toomey has held for months, to perhaps a much tighter race?

Well, the answer today is “no.” In fact, the entire state of Pennsylvania is turning into a black hole for Democrats. Among the polls released today are these :

Pennsylvania Senate – Sestak vs. Toomey (Rasmussen Reports)
Toomey 49, Sestak 39 Toomey +10

Pennsylvania 7th District – Meehan vs. Lentz (Franklin & Marshall)
Meehan 34, Lentz 31 Meehan +3

Pennsylvania 10th District – Marino vs. Carney (Times Leader/Critical Insight)
Marino 44, Carney 38 Marino +6

Pennsylvania 11th District – Barletta vs. Kanjorski (Times Leader/Critical Insights)
Barletta 43, Kanjorski 41 Barletta +2

That’s Sestak getting trounced, two House incumbents trailing, and Democrats losing in Sestak’s open seat. And this comes after another Pa. Democrat, Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper of PA-3, was cut loose by the party (she will likely lose by doubt digits).

There are still three other races to watch: In PA-8, Mike Fitzpatrick is competitive and (update) in a survey released today, leads Rep. Pat Murphy by five points and has more than 50 percent of the vote. R. In PA-12, the Critz vs. Burns rematch looks like a real race.

(Keith Rothfus has not posted any impressive numbers yet in PA-4 against Rep. Jason Altmire, D, but in this environment, and perhaps with a bit of outside help, who knows? The district was drawn for a Republican back in 2001.)

The bottom line: There’s no independent indications of the turnaround that the DSCC is selling — not yet, anyway. You have to wonder what they were thinking when they spent $4 million on negative ads against Toomey. If other Republicans like Sharron Angle, Mark Kirk and Ken Buck win this year, they should thank Toomey for absorbing so much of the Democrats’ budget.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: washingtonexaminer.com



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)10/20/2010 3:14:55 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
*** The Campaigner in Chief hard at work. ***

Obama to Appear on Stewart's 'Daily Show' Oct. 27

Associated Press
Published October 19, 2010

-- President Barack Obama is taking his campaign message to "The Daily Show" with Jon Stewart.

White House spokesman Dan Pfeiffer says Obama is taping an appearance on Oct. 27, just days before the Nov. 2 elections. Stewart is coming to Washington next week for the "Rally to Restore Sanity" he is holding three days later on Saturday, Oct. 30, on the National Mall.

The host of the Comedy Central show says the rally is for people who think the loudest voices shouldn't be the only ones people hear.

Obama recently endorsed Stewart's event. It will be the president's first appearance on Stewart's program.

.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)10/20/2010 5:06:06 AM
From: Sully-1 Recommendation  Respond to of 35834
 
GOP in the Lead in Final Lap of Midterm Elections

The Wall Street Journal
Published October 19, 2010

A vigorous post-Labor Day Democratic offensive has failed to diminish the resurgent Republicans' lead among likely voters, leaving the GOP poised for major gains in congressional elections two weeks away, according to a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll.

Among likely voters, Republicans hold a 50 percent to 43 percent edge, up from a three-percentage-point lead a month ago.

In the broader category of registered voters, 46 percent favor a Democratic-controlled Congress, compared with 44 percent who want Republican control. But in the 92 House districts considered most competitive, the GOP's lead among registered voters is 14 points, underscoring the Democrats' challenge in maintaining their hold on the House. The poll of 1,000 registered voters was taken Oct. 14-18.

"It's hard to say Democrats are facing anything less than a category four hurricane," said Peter Hart, the Democratic pollster who conducts the Journal poll with Republican pollster Bill McInturff. "And it's unlikely the Democratic House will be left standing."

The heightened energy among Republican-leaning voters has been a feature of public opinion for months, with many voters anxious about the economy and unhappy with the Democratic-led Congress.

Some Democrats say the numbers may overstate the GOP's potential gains. Democratic leaders accept that the "enthusiasm gap" between the parties is real, but are trying to counter it with tens of millions of dollars aimed at getting out the vote, said Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster working on a number of House races.

"Generic Republicans in these broad polls are more popular than individual Republicans,'' Lake said, citing policy positions of some GOP candidates, such as modifying Social Security by adding private accounts, which she said are unpopular.

Click here for the full story from the Wall Street Journal.

.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)10/22/2010 7:35:16 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Big GOP advantage among absentee ballots in Pennsylvania

By: Mark Hemingway
Commentary Staff Writer
10/20/10 4:10 PM EDT

Roll Call has stunning report on early voting trends in Pennsylvania:

<<< While Rep. Joe Sestak (D) appears to have seized the momentum in Pennsylvania’s Senate contest, Keystone State Republicans are far more active than Democrats in early voting activity, according to absentee balloting figures released by the state Wednesday at Roll Call’s request.

Pennsylvania voters have requested nearly 127,000 absentee ballots so far. Of that total, Republican voters made up 50 percent and Democrats made up 42 percent, according to figures collected Tuesday afternoon.

The state records show Republicans are returning their absentee ballots in greater numbers as well. The state has received about 40 percent of requested ballots, and Republican registrations outpace Democrats by 19 points, 56 percent to 37 percent, according to the state data. Absentee ballots made up 5 percent of total turnout in 2008. >>>

Granted, 127,000 ballots is a drop in the bucket compared to he total number of votes that could be cast in Pennsylvania, but if this sample is even remotely representative of the composition of the state’s electorate in this election, Democrats are in for a world of hurt.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: washingtonexaminer.com



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)10/22/2010 8:31:21 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Nov 2 - Time to Foreclose Both Houses



Chip Bok from Creators Syndicate

creators.com



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)10/24/2010 1:21:04 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Digging Into the Early Voting Numbers...

Jim Geraghty
The Campaign Spot
In Early Voting

One of my readers, Charlie, takes a look at the early voting numbers from 2008 and compares them to the early voting numbers in 2010, or at least so far.

He finds, "in every state where there is partisan split data for both years, the Republicans have gained in early voting." The shift in partisan turnout has ranged from Republicans gaining 4.2 percentage points from the 2008 numbers (West Virginia) to 27.4 percentage points in the 2008 numbers (Florida).

(The stunning figure is that 52.8 percent of the more than 778,000 early votes in Florida this year come from registered Republicans.)

Colorado's early vote is 7.1 percentage points more Republican.

Iowa's early vote is 10.2 percentage points more Republican.

Louisiana's early vote is 25.9 percentage points more Republican.

Maine's early vote is 13.3 percentage points more Republican.

North Carolina's early vote is 14.9 percentage points more Republican.

In Clark County, Nevada, it is 7.1 percent more Republican; in Washoe County, Nevada, it is 11 percent more Republican.

"The average of these states show that early voting has shifted from a D+16.6 partisan split to a D+1.7 partisan split for a Republican gain of +14.9% since 2008," Charlie concludes.

.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)10/26/2010 7:19:29 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
We're Gallup-ing Slightly Slower Now

Jim Geraghty
The Campaign Spot
In Generic Ballot

Here comes the Democrats' comeback!

Well, sort of:

<<< Republicans remain in position to win control of the House of Representatives in next week's midterm elections, although Democrats are doing slightly better now than they were early in October. Gallup's latest two-week average on its generic ballot for Congress shows Republicans retaining a 48% to 44% margin among all registered voters, a 52% to 43% margin among likely voters in a high-turnout scenario, and a 55% to 41% margin in a low-turnout scenario. These likely voter advantages for the Republicans are slightly smaller than in previous weeks, reflecting in particular increased Democratic strength over the most recent days of interviewing...

Gallup's statistical estimates based on historical U.S. House-vote data by party suggest that the Republicans need a 52% share of the two-party national House vote to be in a position to win control of the House.

Independent likely voters remain substantially more likely to support the GOP candidate in their district than the Democratic candidate. However, the Republican margin among independents has narrowed. Independents who are likely voters have moved from giving Republicans a 25-point advantage in late September/early October to a 15-point margin today. Under a low-turnout scenario, the Republican margin among independents has dropped from 29 points to 23 points. >>>

Just remember, in October 1994, the generic ballot split, 47-47. In October 2002, Democrats led, 49 percent to 43 percent, and that turned out to be a pretty good midterm for the GOP.



.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)10/26/2010 7:30:22 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Independents Backing Republicans by Double-Digit Margin, Poll Shows

FoxNews.com
Published October 25, 2010

Independents are flocking to Republican candidates, according to a new poll, signaling an important shift in the critical voting bloc that helped boost Democrats the past two cycles.

A Politico/George Washington University poll showed independents choosing Republicans by a 14-point margin. The survey showed those voters held a bleaker-than-average view of key Democratic policies -- 62 percent had an unfavorable view of the health care law, compared with 52 percent for all voters; 66 percent said the stimulus is not working, compared with 57 percent for all voters.

The movement continues a trend that started when independents began breaking for the GOP in the Virginia and New Jersey gubernatorial races and Massachusetts Senate race.

The surge in independent support boosts Republicans' chances with the midterm election, which is just more than a week away. Though the polls are tightening in a handful of races, Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele said Sunday he's confident the party can take control of Congress.

The latest poll showed Republicans leading Democrats overall by 47-42 percent.

The survey of 1,000 likely voters was conducted Oct. 17-20. It had a margin of error of 3.1 percentage points.

.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)10/26/2010 7:37:59 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Military Vote in Question After DOJ Gives Illinois 'Pass' on MOVE Act, Advocacy Group Warns

FoxNews.comPublished October 25, 2010

Military voters from the land of Lincoln could be shut out of the midterm election after the Justice Department reached an agreement with Illinois that gave the state "a pass" for violating federal election law, an advocacy group warned Monday.


The Justice Department hammered out the court agreement Friday addressing the failure of 35 Illinois counties to send military and overseas absentee ballots 45 days before the election -- a requirement of the MOVE Act. The agreement gave voters from six of those counties a few extra days to send back their ballots but did not specifically address the other 29 counties.

Eric Eversole, a former Justice voting section attorney who runs the nonprofit Military Voter Protection Project, told FoxNews.com the deal effectively lets wayward Illinois election officials off the hook and does little to ensure the state's military voters get their ballots in time.

"For at least 29 counties, there were absolutely no consequences," he said. "Illinois is precisely the reason why you can't wait until a week before the election to try and resolve a clear violation of military voting rights."

For some overseas military voters, he said, "it might not get there."


The Illinois agreement was the final deal struck by the Justice Department to address states' failure to send their ballots out in time. While agreements with other states had tougher provisions compelling them to send out more express ballots and extending the deadline to receive them by many more days, Eversole's group said the Illinois decree gave "no meaningful relief" to military voters.

There is an online alternative for some military voters who do not receive paper ballots in time, and the administration is urging service members to use that option if they need to.

Bob Carey, director of the Federal Voting Assistance Program, said in a written statement that voters from 39 states can access full ballots online.

"That number includes New York and Illinois, where we have the most significant problems with late ballot delivery," he said.

Military voters can visit FVAP.gov to access the online system; all voters also can file federal write-in absentee ballots, which are available online and include federal candidates.

"Even if voters have not received their absentee ballots, it's not too late to vote," Carey said.

Nearly a dozen states have struggled to come into compliance with the MOVE Act. The Justice Department has reached agreements with eight of them, including Illinois, and has filed lawsuits against three of them. The department subsequently hammered out agreements with those three states -- New York, New Mexico and Wisconsin.

Thomas Perez, assistant attorney general for the Civil Rights Division, said in a statement Friday that the Illinois agreement "will ensure that the state's military and overseas voters can participate in the upcoming federal elections."

The deadline to send out ballots, which 35 counties missed, was Sept. 18. For six counties where ballots were sent out between 16 and 20 days late, the agreement extends the deadline to receive ballots from Nov. 16 by two to three days. For those counties, the deadline to postmark the ballots moves from Nov. 1 to Nov. 2.

But the agreement does not offer a specific remedy for the 29 counties where ballots were mailed out between two and 12 days late. It instead includes a section that says election officials must mail out, either electronically or by express mail, "properly and timely requested" ballots they learn were not transmitted -- and then accept Nov. 2-postmarked ballots until Nov. 19. The decree also orders officials to make sure all requested electronic ballots are sent out.

Justice spokeswoman Xochitl Hinojosa said the 29 counties did not get extra time because they already have 14 extra days after the election for their ballots to be received. She said the ballots will get to them in time and if any voter's on-time ballot is not counted, "we can file a lawsuit."

Eversole, though, said the agreement just doesn't go far enough. He said it could have at the very least explicitly extended the deadline for all 35 counties. And he expressed concern that the agreement did little to prevent the violations from happening again in 2012, saying it sends the message that so long as states accept ballots after Election Day, they can ignore the 45-day requirement in the MOVE Act. The 45 days, though, were meant to give military voters enough time to receive and send back their ballots before Election Day.

"It's just the wrong message to send," Eversole said.




To: Sully- who wrote (35118)10/27/2010 8:36:15 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Rasmussen has Angle up by 4

By: David Freddoso
Online Opinion Editor
10/26/10 2:00 PM EDT

Yet another piece of bad news for Democrats, one week before Election Day.

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Voters in Nevada finds [Republican Sharron] Angle with 49% support to [Democrat Harry] Reid’s 45%. Four percent (4%) like some other candidate in the race, and two percent (2%) remain undecided with one week until Election Day.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: washingtonexaminer.com



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)10/29/2010 1:29:08 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Thank You, Lord Barack, for the Great Awakening

By Stuart Schwartz
American Thinker

It is time to thank Barack Obama -- or Lord Barack, as our media elites might prefer, having declared him a "sort of God." He said memorably in April that the Tea Partiers "should be saying thank you" for the great job he's been doing. And now, as Election Day approaches, vast swathes of the country are ready to give him the acknowledgment he seeks. Thank you, Mr. President, for giving back our country.

Now, it certainly is not what he had in mind.
His point, of course, was that the Tea Party, instead of protesting, should be grateful for the transformation he has been bringing about. He has been vocal about an ungrateful electorate that doesn't understand the magnitude of his accomplishments. Instead, we disappoint, suffering from what Charles Krauthammer calls "Obama Underappreciation Syndrome."

The ungrateful masses look at what Obama hath wrought and see a federal government taking over their lives, debt biblically extending to "our children's children," and a ruling class that lives large while taxpayers now spend a quarter of their lives working to pay for its excesses. Taxpayers are footing the bill for unprecedented self-indulgence, prompting one American Thinker blogger to comment on the arrangements for the Obama's post-election jaunt to India: "Suleiman the Magnificent would have been embarrassed by the luxury Mr. and Mrs. B.O. intend for themselves." The inimitable James Taranto in the Wall Street Journal called him "the America Nero," acting more like an "emperor" than a president.

Even the reliably obtuse traditional media, which are to insight what Bill Clinton is to feminism, can see the staggering "elitism and condescension" in which Washington is awash. Barack Obama has put his stamp upon Washington. Even Peggy Noonan, peeking out from behind Woody Allen's mansion on Manhattan's Upper West Side, has noticed that he has brought us a United States of "status quo, Washington, [and] leftism."

P.J. O'Rourke sees an Obama States of America as Detroit-writ-large, with the president extending the life previously reserved by Democrats for their core constituencies to the average American. The humorist says the president is creating a nation of "vile schools, lawless slums, economic stagnation, and social immobility." Thomas Lifson described this as "progressive feudalism," condemning the average American to a grim subsistence with "more and more of our lives ... regulated by government bureaucrats setting rules and regulations and licensing people."

However, gratitude is what the president wants, and gratitude is what he will get on Tuesday. Barack Obama, through a unique blend of excess and incompetence, has authored a new Great Awakening, that eighteenth-century religious revival that unified American Christians in a common understanding of religion and faith. In the Obama Great Awakening, Americans are rediscovering the truths that progressivism has labored to erase. So thank you, Barack Obama, for helping to unite a nation around truths that include:


1. Smart people ain't so smart. Obama has assembled a collection of bureaucrats who -- their walls papered with advanced degrees -- are hailed, in the words of New York Times Obamaphile David Brooks, as an "educated class" born to lead. But the nation is about to say thanks, for this collection of brainiacs has ruined everything it has touched. Yes, the head of the Obama energy department is a Nobel Prize-winning physicist who can theorize like nobody's business. But ask him to put boats on the Gulf to clean up the oil and he will appoint a panel of academics to study the carbon footprint of the marine diesel engine -- forget the boats, leave the oil, and cut me a piece of that green energy pie-in-the-sky. Meanwhile, even the president's own oil spill commission "blasted" what one progressive historian called "the smartest guy ever to become president" for his inept response to the spill.

Health care, anyone? Harvard policymakers created a blueprint for a medical future that is already delivering "high costs, red tape," and a dramatically expanded bureaucracy. Guided by Obama and a Democrat Congress, the best and brightest, envision the ideal big-city emergency room of the future as a service staffed by a doctor, a nurse, 180 administrators, and 499 physician assistants hired and trained by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

2. Dumb people ain't so dumb. Thank you, Barack Obama -- results matter. Teleprompters and professional politicians are out; real people with real lives are in. Sarah Palin is dumb, Sharron Angle is stupid, and Rand Paul isn't even smart enough to give a god a proper name (I mean, "Aqua Buddha"? C'mon -- makes you long for the good ol' days of Zeus, Apollo, and Ted, the last a progressive god who just made the journey down the River Styx). But Investor's Business Daily praised Palin for the Tea Party revolution, even the Washington Post says Angle in Nevada is poised to take down the most powerful Democrat in the U.S. Senate, and Aqua Buddha will soon join John Kerry in that Mount Olympus of privilege, the U.S. Senate. Tea Party dumb -- just what the country needs.

3. Mainstream media are out of touch and untrustworthy. Katie Couric of CBS News just embarked on a tour of what she terms "this great unwashed middle of the country" to "divine the mood" of the voters. Huh? Drudge sums up the coming Republican victory as "Gallup Sees Tidal Wave," American Thinker sees a "Republican Renaissance," Real Clear Politics says early voting suggests a "Republican wave," and the news anchor of a major broadcast network is trying to figure out the mood of the country by talking with smelly people outside of Manhattan? Small wonder trust in what Sarah Palin calls "Lamestream Media" continues to hit new lows.

4. The founders were smart. Educators tell us our colonial founders were a bunch of privileged white guys who oppressed natives, savaged the earth, and then parked their yachts in Rhode Island. Think 56 John Kerrrys in drag, all white wigs and ruffled sleeves and tights. But we have now rediscovered that the U.S. Constitution is the best guarantee we have for freedom and prosperity and, combined with the Declaration of Independence, a vital blueprint for individual and corporate success. Send legislators to Washington who "think the Constitution is wrong" -- as one Democrat opined -- and liberty and prosperity suffer.

5. Speaking of education: the rot is deep. It will take decades to turn this around. If the U.S. Department of Education were to vanish tomorrow, the immediate effect would be a major hit to the profits of trendy Beltway bars. But the education establishment would remain, the same one putting our money behind programs to train students for "global citizenship" rather than reading, writing, and math. And the same one that has come to Washington to create the programs which two-thirds of the country say have put us on the "wrong track," according to Rasmussen.

On Election Day, Barack Obama will get the gratitude he deserves.

Stuart Schwartz, formerly a media and retail executive, is Professor of Communication at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia.

.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)11/2/2010 5:21:02 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Why I Now Vote Party, not Individual

Dennis Prager

There is an American tradition of voting not for the party, but "for the man." Unlike Europeans, who are more ideologically driven, Americans have prided themselves in assessing individuals of both parties, and then voting for the more personally impressive candidate. The European parliamentary system of government fosters ideological voting whereas the American political system does to a much lesser degree. With only two parties competing in American elections, each party has had to encompass a much wider spectrum of ideologies.

This is no longer the case. For better or for worse, the notion of voting for the candidate rather than the party is now mostly naive idealism. The Democratic Party is now fully left-wing, and is simply the American version of any European Social Democratic party. It is the party of ever-expanding government. (The Republican Party, in contrast, is — at long last — the party of small government.)

There are two reasons to vote Democrat: either one is a Leftist or one has come to believe the Left's demonization of its opponents as SIXHIRB (Sexist, Intolerant, Xenophobic, Homophobic, Islamophobic, Racist, Bigoted).

Oh, yes, there is a third reason to vote Democrat: More and more Americans are employed by the government, and more and more Americans receive significant material benefits from it. So one does not have to have left-wing values or believe in the demonization of conservatives to vote Democrat. All one has to do is vote according to where one's livelihood comes from.

Along with the minority groups that it has effectively convinced it alone protects, the Democratic Party has, therefore, created a built-in voting bloc that is formidable.

Why, then, will Republicans do well this year? Because the Democrats went too far left and the country has serious economic problems.

Of course, Republicans cannot and should not depend on economic recessions to win elections. They have to make the case as clearly as possible why America's success is the result of its most distinguishing trait: limited government. They have to show that the Democratic Party undermines the primary reason for America's success — limited government, America's most distinguishing trait. And Republicans need to make clear the connection between Democratic policies and America's economic problems.

It is probably accurate to say that no country in the world has less government intervention in the lives of its citizens than America does. But Democrats do not like such American distinctiveness. They want America to be like other countries. The president, recall, does not believe in American exceptionalism.

For all these reasons, I admit that I am prepared to vote for a less personally impressive Republican over a more personally impressive Democrat. The Republican will vote for America's values (E Pluribus Unum, In God We Trust, and Liberty, which by definition means small government). The Democrat, no matter how personally charismatic, will not vote for these values.

This is my response to the liberal media, which have portrayed virtually every popular conservative in my lifetime as a mediocrity at best, a dummy at worst. In not one case — from Ronald Reagan to George W. Bush to Sarah Palin — was the media's depiction accurate. To give but one example, George W. Bush can probably run rings around Vice President Joseph Biden in his understanding and knowledge of history and of the world.

But even if the media's depictions were accurate, it wouldn't matter to me. I will take common sense and values over intellect any day and in any election. Left-wing intellectuals have abysmal track records when it comes to confronting great evil in the world. Their willingness to fight tyrants and despots is one of consistent and abject moral failure.

Take the left's favorite Republican to depict as a dummy, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

This country would be in considerably better shape if Palin were either vice president or president. Palin would have confronted Iran rather than place her faith in negotiations and the United Nations. She would not have sought to impose a peace on Israel (as if peace can ever be imposed by outsiders on any countries, let alone upon those in which one of the parties seeks to annihilate the other). She would not have bought into Keynesian economics and spent nearly a trillion dollars largely to keep overpaid and overcompensated government workers voting Democrat. She would not have expanded the number of government agencies and "czars" to the point that this country may well be governed for the next two years not by congressional laws but by unelected and unaccountable federal agencies. She would not have declared a date by which America will leave Afghanistan and thereby ensured that fewer and fewer Afghans fight alongside America. She would not have signed a 2,000-page bill about anything, let alone health care. She would have expanded oil drilling in America so that we can actually begin the long journey to energy independence, not the imaginary journey to windmills and solar panels. She would never have considered taxing energy, the engine of our economy, on the increasingly absurd claims that human carbon dioxide emissions will bring the planet to ruin.

So, it is time for us Americans to realize that the old days of choosing the better candidate are gone. The Democrats have, at least in this way, achieved their goal of rendering us more European — we will have to vote by party.

That's the bad news. The good news is that in almost no case is the choice between a more impressive Democrat and a less impressive Republican. The quality of most Republican candidates this election is the highest in post-war American history, Republican or Democrat. But even if it weren't, a Republican mediocrity would get my vote. My first concern is America's greatness, not the candidate's.

Dennis Prager hosts a nationally syndicated radio talk show and is a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. He is the author of four books, most recently "Happiness Is a Serious Problem" (HarperCollins). His website is www.dennisprager.com.

.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)11/2/2010 6:50:15 AM
From: Sully-1 Recommendation  Respond to of 35834
 
Well, I'm off to vote.

Hope you all make it to the polls today too.

:-)



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)11/2/2010 5:49:17 PM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 35834
 
Rove says a shift of 107 state legislative seats could push up to 190 House seats to the GOP side in 2012

By: Mark Tapscott
Editorial Page Editor
11/02/10 9:45 AM EDT

Yes, you read that headline correctly. Former Bush White House political mastermind Karl Rove sits down with Flash Report's Jon Fleischman to talk about the California Senate race, the GOP presidential race for 2012 and everything in between.

In the course of the conversation, Rove drops this intriguing observation:

"I think we will have a gain of about 450 state legislative seats. A shift of 107 seats in the right places, like three seats in Ohio, four seats in Michigan, three seats in Pennsylvania house; a shift of 107 seats if they are in the right places gives us control of an additional 190 congressional seats."

The audio is not the greatest, so Rove might be saying "a hundred or 90," instead of 190, but either way, it's an arresting piece of data.

That observation starts at 1:37 into an eight-minute interview. Lots of interesting observations. Love him or hate him, Rove is never at a loss for something genuinely interesting to say on all things political.

YouTube: FR interviews Karl Rove - 11.1.10

Read more at the Washington Examiner: washingtonexaminer.com



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)11/2/2010 5:57:52 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Democratic campaign manager: ‘Turnout isn’t where we need it to be in our strong areas.’

By: Mark Hemingway
Commentary Staff Writer
11/02/10 2:35 PM EDT

I would caution you not to read much of anything into anecdotal evidence, but the campaign of Rep. Steve Kagen, D-Wis., sent out the following email:

<<< Dear XXXX,

We have just been going over the morning voting numbers – and turnout isn’t where we need it to be in our strong areas.

This race is going to be a squeaker – and every vote will count.

Please call your friends, family and neighbors and make sure they vote. If you can get five of your friends to vote, we will win.

You can register to vote at your polling place. Find your polling location by clicking here. Please forward this email to your friends in the district.

Sincerely,

Julie Heun, Campaign Manager

Kagen4Congress >>>

Read more at the Washington Examiner: washingtonexaminer.com



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)11/2/2010 6:09:24 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Cuyahoga County, Ohio, Not Coming Out in Big Numbers

Jim Geraghty
The Campaign Spot

Over in Ohio, Third Base Politics sends word that the Board of Elections director says Cuyahoga County -- the one that includes Cleveland -- is on pace for 430,000 out of about 978,000 registered voters, roughly 43 percent turnout.

For perspective, the county made up almost all of Obama's margin of victory in Ohio in 2008. Obama won 458,422 votes in this county in 2008, and beat McCain by 258,542 votes; Obama's margin in Ohio was 262,224.

Democrats Ted Strickland and Lee Fisher needed big margins out of Cleveland, and so far, it's not coming together for them.

UPDATE: The prediction is now revised downward: 410,000.

.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)11/2/2010 6:13:04 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Gallup: 2010 Enthusiasm Gap Is Roughly Double 1994, 2006

Jim Geraghty
The Campaign Spot

Can you stand one more poll? Because Gallup offers one last doozy before the votes are counted:

<<< Americans' enthusiasm about voting exceeds the recent midterm election high set four years ago, with 50% of Americans and 53% of registered voters saying they are more enthusiastic than usual about voting in 2010.

These results are based on the USA Today/Gallup final 2010 pre-election poll, conducted Oct. 28-31.

The record level of overall enthusiasm is primarily the result of Republicans' heightened excitement -- 63% of Republicans (including Republican-leaning independents) say they are more enthusiastic than usual about voting. That not only greatly exceeds Democrats' expressed enthusiasm this year, but also is substantially higher than what Gallup has measured for either party's supporters on the eve of a midterm election.

The high level of Republican enthusiasm has led to the largest gap in enthusiasm by party of any recent midterm elections, 19 percentage points. The prior highs were nine points in favor of the Democrats in 2006, and nine points in favor of the Republicans in 1994.

The party with the advantage in enthusiasm has won the greater share of the national congressional vote, and gained seats in the House, each election year since Gallup began tracking voter enthusiasm in 1994. >>>


Got that? "The largest gap in enthusiasm by party of any recent midterm elections, 19 percentage points." Roughly double 1994 or 2006! Either Gallup is way off, or we're going to see epic Republican wins tonight.


.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)11/2/2010 6:36:31 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Final Gallup enthusiasm gap: nineteen points

by Ed Morrissey
Hot Air
12:10 pm on November 2, 2010



Can GOP hang 10 in the Senate?

Gallup released its final polling on voter enthusiasm today, and the bottom line is that it’s record-breaking for midterm elections. In fact, for Democrats and their leaners, it’s the second-best enthusiasm level in a midterm election Gallup has seen at 44%, only topped by 2006's 53% and their nine-point lead over the GOP in that wave election.

The bad news for Democrats? Well ….

<<< Americans’ enthusiasm about voting exceeds the recent midterm election high set four years ago, with 50% of Americans and 53% of registered voters saying they are more enthusiastic than usual about voting in 2010. …

The record level of overall enthusiasm is primarily the result of Republicans’ heightened excitement — 63% of Republicans (including Republican-leaning independents) say they are more enthusiastic than usual about voting. That not only greatly exceeds Democrats’ expressed enthusiasm this year, but also is substantially higher than what Gallup has measured for either party’s supporters on the eve of a midterm election.

The high level of Republican enthusiasm has led to the largest gap in enthusiasm by party of any recent midterm elections, 19 percentage points. The prior highs were nine points in favor of the Democrats in 2006, and nine points in favor of the Republicans in 1994. >>>

This means that we can look forward to a big turnout today, for which Gallup had prepared by running two models of likely voters in their previous generic Congressional balloting. This suggests that their models may have slightly underestimated the amplitude of the wave today. The 63% mark is 19 points higher than the enthusiasm number for the GOP in 1994, when Republicans took 52 seats. The gap is more than twice as large in that election, and in 2006.

The question then becomes not so much how many House seats the GOP can grab in this wave, but how many Senate seats they can take. The polls showing the GOP losing in some close races suddenly look rather suspect in the face of a gap this size. They need 10 to get control of the Senate, and converting close races in West Virginia, Washington, California, and Illinois would make that happen.

.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)11/2/2010 6:56:45 PM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 35834
 
Who Do You Want to See Concede?

By Lorie Byrd on Elections
Wizbang

Who do you most want to hear concede tonight? My top votes are:

1) Bob "Who're You?" Etheridge (I work for his opponent Renee Ellmers who could use your vote today!)

2) Alan Grayson

3) Harry Reid

There are so many more though -- Mike McIntyre, Charlie Crist, Barney Frank, Patty Murray, etc. Who is on your list?


.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)11/2/2010 7:04:29 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
FoxNews projects:

Dan Coats [R] wins Senate in IN

Rand Paul [R - Tea Pary] wins Senate in KY

.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)11/2/2010 7:11:58 PM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 35834
 
FoxNews projects:

Incumbent Jim Demint - [R] SC wins Senate seat

Incumbent Patrick Lehey [D] wins Senate seat in VT

.



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)11/4/2010 3:20:03 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Election 2010



Michael Ramirez Editorial Cartoons

investors.com



To: Sully- who wrote (35118)11/4/2010 3:38:07 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Re: Historic GOP Gains in State Legislatures

John Hood
The Corner

If I'm reading the updated vote totals correctly, state legislative races around the country are showing a trend that is extremely favorable to the GOP.

Republicans appear to have taken over Democratic state senates in Alabama, Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Carolina, and Wisconsin. They appear to have taken over Democratic state houses in Alabama, Colorado, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. That's a 19-chamber pickup (earlier, I said 20, but I miscounted). The GOP fell just two seats short of taking the Iowa senate and didn't move the needle in the Alaska senate, which remains tied.

The National Conference of State Legislatures is a handy source for election results, but they haven't yet posted seat counts for legislative races in New York, Oregon, and Washington. The New York senate, at least, was considered competitive going into Tuesday, and as of 11 a.m. this morning, the chamber is tied with a very real possibility of Republicans getting to a majority when final counts are posted (there are three close races). Still, even with those three states missing from the nationwide totals, Republicans currently claim a majority of senate and house seats across the country, a first in modern times.

Finally, look at the states with both Republican governors and legislatures. They now include key political battlegrounds such as Michigan, Pennsylvania, Indiana, and Wisconsin, plus Tennessee and Alabama which are catching up to most of their Southern neighbors in this regard (North Carolina, Mississippi, and Arkansas remain the outliers, the first two still having divided governments and the latter a fully Democratic one). In addition to crafting pivotal congressional-redistricting maps next year, these states are going to be laboratories for conservative governance in the months and years to come. Not coincidentally, they could also prove to be incubators for future Republican candidates for federal office.

.