Local Elections

Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.

John Adams

As we continue to see the GOP head for the hills while the left braces for what they believe is going to be a banner year it’s worth noting the significant differences between what is expected to be the great blue wave of 2018 to the big red wave that actually happened in 2010.

#1 Obamacare vs the Tax Bill

The Big red wave of 2010 took place after the passage of Obamacare, one of the most unpopular laws in the history of lawmaking by a congress. Democrats were assured by their leadership and the media that one the law was passed it would become more and more popular with the public come election day. That was not the case. Republicans (falsely it turns out) promised to repeal Obama if given the chance and the voters decided to give them that chance.

The most significant law that was passed by this congress was the tax bill of 2017. It was excoriated in the media and we were assured by the Democrats and the left that it’s unpopularity would continue to grow the opposite has been the case. Many Democrats are running on the idea of repealing this bill and raising taxes. I suspect that will not be as popular as repealing Obamacare but in fairness to the Democrats I have no doubt that they will attempt to do so if elected.

#2. The 2002 map vs the 2012 maps

In 2010 the year of the big red wave the Republicans tax ran on the same congressional maps that the Democrats had won big on it 2006 and 2008, however the wave of 2010 extended was not limited to congress but took place over the entire nation giving the GOP an unprecedented number of seats at the state level just before redistricting. This means that the supposed “big blue wave” is going to have to break on a set of maps that specifically favor republicans in the house.

#3 The 2010 Senate Landscape vs 2018 Senate Landscape.

In 2010, the year of the big red wave the split of seats up for election was unremarkable 19 republican seats were up vs 18 democrat seats (counting special elections) but the Democrats had a huge majority (59-41 counting the two “independents” who voted with dems). The end result was the Democrats still held that majority but it shrunk to 52-47. In 2018 the republican majority is only 51-49 an even split in a divided country but only 9 GOP seats are up for re-election this year vs 24 for the Democrats, many of them in states that President Trump won. Democrats to take the majority will have to win 26 races out of 33.

4. 2010 Retirements vs 2018 retirements

In 2010 the retirement ratio of republicans to democrats was 20-17. Once again 17 Democrats are retiring but 38 republicans over 15% of the caucus have decided to give this election a miss. Given that the Democrats only need 24 seats this would seem a great advantage, but given that the GOP base is unhappy with the current congress’ inability to act (in fairness the Senate is mostly to blame here) the removal of incumbents associated with a “do nothing” congress might actually work in the GOP’s favor, or to put it another way, how many seats might the Democrats saved in 2010 if 38 Democrats who voted for Obamacare decided to retire in 2010 rather than run for re-election?

5. The 2010 Economy vs the 2018 Economy

In 2010 the Democrats had overwhelming majorities in both the House and Senate and were presiding over one of the worst economies in living memory and that was before the effects of Obamacare began to take effect. The Democrats had to run blaming said bad economy not on President Obama but on President Bush and the promise of prosperity just around the corner. In 2018 the economy is growing like gangbusters, the strong stock market is way up vs election day 2016 and people surging back into the work. Members of the GOP can run on keeping the good times rolling while Democrats are running on a combination of impeachment and raising taxes, in effect killing the goose that laid the golden eggs. It remains to be seen how popular that message is going to be.

6. The 2010 expectations vs the 2018 expectations.

With a few exceptions like the bloggers on the ground absolutely nobody saw the 2010 red wave coming. The warning shot of the Scott Brown election was considered by many an outlier and the Tea Party movement that drove the 2010 election was discounted by the media which assured us that the passage of Obamacare along with what they claimed was an improving economy would spell good news for Democrats and the party believed it. It wasn’t until the week before the election, sometimes the day before, that the media realized that there was something rotten in Denmark. In 2018 the media, the pundits and even some in the GOP, despite the roaring economy, see trouble ahead. Despite the favorable economy, their money advantage and favorable maps absolutely nobody in the party is taking this election for granted and while you are seeing a few pro-forma statements about retaining the majority you aren’t seeing the overconfidence that the Democrats and media showed in 2010 and 2016 right up to the final week. The GOP sees the rocks ahead with a full six months to do something about it.

7. A Trending down Incumbent in 2010 failing expectations vs an Trending up Incumbent surpassing expectations in 2018

No president was ever elected with Higher expectations than Barack Obama, the expectations for him were so high that he won a Nobel Peace prize simply for existing. 2010, the second year of his presidency was when reality started to creep in.

In 2010 Barack Obama started with an approval rating of 51-43 (Gallup weekly). This was pretty low point for him at the time as he had held a positive approval rating for all of 2009 spending the first half of the year in the 60’s and all but two weeks in the fifties to end it. He held a positive approval rating until the week of June 21st where his rating dropped to 45-46 July. While he would have one “even” week (Sept 6th) he would keep an approval rating he averaged an approval rating was -2.2 (45-47) from that point to election day which was a stark contrast to where he started on election day 2009 (67-13). During this entire time President Obama was constantly lionized by the press.

By contrast no president came to office with lower expectations that Donald Trump. The predictions were dire for the economy and the world with people literally expecting to be put into camps and the media and the world stoking such fears. In 2018 once again reality started to creep into this narrative.

Gallup ended its presidential approval polling in Jan of 2018 however Rasmussen continued daily tracking polls (no option for undecideds like gallup) and also runs an “approval index” based on those who “strongly approve” vs “strongly disapprove”

That “approval index” has not been a positive number since March 3rd 2017 and spent most of 2017 in the high teens to low 20’s. 2018 has seen a different trend President Trump reached single negative digits in feb and has remained in the low teens to high single digits chiefly from the “Strongly approve” number now being consistently in the 30’s rather than the 20’s

In terms of raw approval on election day Donald Trump had 56-44 approval rating. By March 17th he had dropped to 49-51 and with the exception of a single day (April 21st 2017) did not have a disapproval number below 50% and managed to reach as high as 62% disapproval.
In 2018 things have leveled off he has had several days where he has hit 50% approval and this month has averaged a 49-51 split.

And all of this is in the face of a press that has been pounding him from day one.

A closing thought, every point here, from the state of the economy to the maps to the polling numbers are based on either verifiable historical and/or the current numbers, or put simply the facts.

The GOP has reality on its side, can they leave their bubble long enough to see it?

Next:  The MSM’s 2018 Tet Offensive on the GOP


If you think reality based reporting and commentary is worth your while then please consider hitting DaTipJar below



Consider subscribing. 8 more subscribers at $20 a month will pay the monthly price for the new host/server.


Choose a Subscription level


Finally might I suggest my book Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer makes an excellent Gift.

Via Drudge McClatchy reports that Democrats desperate to find anything that resembles victor are finding some hope deep in a few state legislative races:

In a party desperate for victories, Democratic candidates are finding the most success in little-noticed state legislative races. They’ve already won four seats previously under Republican control, some of them in battleground districts that split evenly between President Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.

Party leaders say it’s a sign that they are benefitting from a broad backlash to the Republican president, one that failed to lift a quartet of special election U.S. House candidates — including Jon Ossoff in Georgia or Rob Quist in Montana — to victories of their own.

In one respect this is not that huge a surprise.  After all in 2014 the GOP had a spectacular year on the state level.

On the state level, the wave continued. State legislatures are also now controlled by Republicans.  That translates to 68 out of 98 legislative chambers according to Real Clear Politics, who also notes that 23 Gubernatorial offices are now held by Republicans in states where both houses are also under Republican control.

Politico noted that Republicans gained more than 300 seats in legislatures and controls legislatures in 29 states; the biggest gains since the 1920’s.

And in 2016 things, as Ballotpedia reports, things continued to improve

Republicans flipped 138 seats while Democrats flipped 95 seats. The Republican Party‘s share of seats in state legislatures increased by 43 seats across the country. Republicans controlled 4,161 (56.4 percent) of the 7,383 legislative seats heading into the election.

In 2010 and 2014, Republicans won hundreds of formerly Democratic-held state legislative seats across the United States. These past successes put them at a relatively greater partisan risk in 2016, since the GOP held a higher percentage of the seats up for election than Democrats. However, Republicans were able to maintain and increase their advantage in state legislative chambers nationwide.

Given the extreme gains for the GOP it would be quite a shock if there wasn’t some recovery for Dems and that McClatchy Story suggests the Democrats are investing in those local races to try to make it happen.

Democrats have vowed to pay more attention to state legislative races after losing hundreds of those seats during President Obama’s tenure. There are signs the party is doing just that six months into Trump’s presidency: The National Democratic Redistricting Committee, a high-profile group with the support of former President Barack Obama and former Attorney General Eric Holder, raised more than $10 million in the second fundraising quarter.

So given these facts and the latest polls showing Trump at 39% can someone tell me why in April Nancy Pelosi was talking like this:(emphasis mine)

Addressing the 2018 midterm elections, Pelosi revealed that Democrats are considering an expansive offensive in Texas, including a possible challenge to Republican U.S. Rep. Pete Olson, who represents Sugar Land. The diversifying Houston suburb is the same region former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay represented during his reign at the U.S. Capitol, and Trump carried that district by eight points.

Earlier this year, Democrats announced they were considering mounting serious challenges to Republican U.S. Reps. Pete Sessions of Dallas and John Culberson of Houston, in addition to their typical target — the West Texas district of Republican U.S. Rep. Will Hurd.

An audience member asked Pelosi if the party intended to go after any Republicans in seats that are overwhelmingly conservative. Pelosi said no; House Democrats would spend their money only on seats they believe they can win, she said.

She said that would “absolutely” be enough for Democrats to win the gavel in 2018.

But Sunday, even after the GOP fell on it’s face over Obamacare and the White House was playing musical staff Nancy Pelosi is reportedly saying stuff like this

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said Sunday it was “unimportant” for Democrats to win back a majority in the lower chamber in the mid-term elections, The Hill reported.

“That’s so unimportant. What is important is that we have the lively debate on a better deal,” Pelosi told Fox News host Chris Wallace on “Fox News Sunday” when asked about the chances Democrats had to win back the House in 2018.

What does that tell you?  It tells me that no matter how bad things look for the GOP the American people have decided that the Democrats are worse.

However JJ Sefton at Ace’s place finds the bright side for the left:

Considering the masks coming off at the moment of truth for Obamacare Repeal, I would not want to wager that the GOP-led legislature will do anything different when it comes to this equally crucial issue. Yup, I’m calling it now: there will be no tax reform. Two reasons, 1) anything that denudes power, influence and lucre from DC will be opposed tooth and nail and 2) they hate Donald Trump so it’s automatic that they will oppose it.

Hence, Nancy Pelosi saying it’s not important for Dems to win the 2018 Midterms is not necessarily a botox-leaking-into-the-cerbral-cortex-induced comment , especially when you have Republicans like McCain, Collins, Murkowski and most of the rest, including of course the leadership.

Of course that won’t stop the bleeding at the state level including the apparently unnewsworthy defection a sitting governor, which our friends on the left consider no big loss.

Those ignorant West Virginia grapes were sour anyways


The Layoff bleg continues. with  5 days to go we’re $  1635 away from the goal to make August dedicated to the blog, the new radio show (shows?) and events.

This blog is a venture in capitalism that depends primarily on readers. You can help finance this by picking up my new book Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) prayer is now available at Amazon

A portion of every sale will go to WQPH 89.3 Catholic Radio) or show your approval by Hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

and if you really want to help for the long term consider subscribing and get my book as a premium


Choose a Subscription level



And as I’ve said before if you can’t spare the cash we will be happy to accept your prayers.

Mrs Cooper:You know how your daddy used to say that you can only fish for so long before you got to throw a stick of dynamite in the water?

Sheldon: Yeah.

Mrs Cooper:Well, I’m done fishing

The Big Bang Theory The Luminous Fish Effect 2007

I’m done.

I’m done asking people to vote for the GOP, I’m done compromising on issues dear to me and I’m done pushing candidates that are willing to say one thing when they want my vote but not willing to act once they have power.

The party seems to forget the reason they have a congressional majority is not due to their own actions but the actions of others.

 In 1994 it was Rush Limbaugh and the conservatives he energized with the help of Hillarycare that motivated voters who previously did not turn out to finally give the GOP their first congressional majority since the 50’s.

It 2010 it was the TeaParty and people who had not gotten involved before energized by the president Obama push for Obamacare and led by Sarah Palin, the one person besides Limbaugh who was not calling for appeasement of Obama that gave the GOP majorities all over the nation just in time for the redrawing of congressional maps.

And it was conservatives again who after being spurned by Mitt Romney & Co and staying home in 2012 gave the party one more shot to do what they promised in 2014.

This abortion bill debacle was the last straw for me.  I left the Democrats 20 years ago when it became clear that a Catholic who actually believed in his faith was no longer welcome, if the GOP doesn’t want social conservatives then it’s time for us to go.

That leads to the obvious question:  Go Where?

Glad you asked, After the last presidential election Mike Rogers sent this comment in E-mail that I posted:.

The time to take over the GOP (state by state) or set up a real third party (let’s call it the conservative party, like NY state), is NOW, after a historic election that demonstrated the ineptness of the “Wizards of Smart”.

The time NOT to talk about and vote for a third part candidate, or stay home and pout about rules that work against you is DURING an historic election, when one of the evils is immeasurably worse than the guy you can’t quite warm to.

If we successfully set up a conservative party, and win some seats, we can choose to align with Republicans or even endorse their candidate as a tactical matter on a vote by vote basis.

Well it is after a historic election and after reading about Mitt Romney embracing climate change, the English & spanish language versions of the SOTU response and the House GOP going feckless on Abortion the time to set up these conservative parties in every state is now.

This VERY week  Committees should begin forming in every state to create State conservative parties.

THIS VERY WEEK:  True believers should be determining exactly legal steps need to be done in each state to be recognized.

This very week, activists should be sounding out potential candidates and writing a statement of principles embracing the following:

1.  Fiscal conservativism & responsibility

2.  Social conservative & personal responsibility

3.  Defending the Judeo Christian values that made America great

As for funding this, if we can’t find conservatives willing to kick in I”m sure our friends on the left would be delighted to provide the seed money to get things going in the hope of splitting the GOP.

This has to be started NOW so that by say April of this year we are in a position to be able to act.

Now I can hear people say:  “DaTechGuy, this is crazy, you’ll just be handing elections to the Democrats who are even worse.  Haven’t you said time and time again you have to vote for the best choice on the ballot?”

Yes I have and on a pragmatic level if the choice in 2016 is Bush vs Clinton I’d much rather have Bush nominate a squish to the Supreme Court than Clinton nominate a radical but this misses the point.

If we have things in place by this summer, well before the primary season for 2016 everything changes for one simple reason that Mike pointed out in his original e-mail.  A point I want to emphasize:

There is absolutely nothing stopping a Massachusetts Conservative Party or a Ohio Conservative Party or a North Carolina Conservative Party from nominating the candidate that wins a GOP primary as their choice for a state district,  a House district, a Senate Seat, a Governorship.  Nor is there anything preventing a national conservative party from nominating the GOP presidential nominee as the choice of their party.

Now put yourself in the place of the GOP both on the national and the state level.

If they see such parties forming, particularly in states that are close, are they more or less likely to frustrate the conservative agenda in the House & Senate and fuel the anger that generates them?

Say you are a member of Congress, perchance one who scuttled the Abortion bill, or is pushing for higher Gas taxes or supporting common core and you see this happening, are you more or less likely to anger conservatives who might choose to run a candidate who will cut into your base?

Say you are a state party preparing to fill a open congressional seat, are you likely to push a RINO that will guarantee a Conservative Party candidate on the ballot or will they find a more conservative candidate that, while not being a Ted Cruz or a Mike Lee would have enough appeal to conservatives to keep them in their camp?

Imagine you’re a state GOP with a strong conservative already sitting, are you to consider a primary challenge to might cause the state conservative party to split off?

Now obviously both human nature and the law of averages tell you that this will not always be enough to motivate the GOP to “Do the right thing” and there will be occasions when our running a candidate will be enough to give a Democrat the odd house seat in a marginal district or even cost us a Senate Seat such as in NH but consider the following:

Right now the GOP has the largest majority it has had in the house for a century.  So if Democrats take a few seats or even 10, it will not give them the strength to advance the liberal agenda.

Additionally what if there had been a 3rd party candidate running in NH instead of clear field.  Might some of those conservatives who stayed home have been enough to not only increase the GOP majority in the statehouse or perhaps give some help to Marilinda Garcia who was ignored by the national GOP?

Would not both the state party and perhaps a candidate such as Kelly Ayotte who had the support of Conservatives like Palin in 2010 seeing thousands of votes for a Conservative candidate in opposition to Brown think long and hard before antagonizing said party before she has to face voters?

Now there are some who might see  new party structure as a chance to become regular guest on media, others who figure getting in on the ground floor of a party will mean power in the long run, still others see this in terms of profit and an easy paycheck.  A new party will always attract such people.

In the long run it doesn’t matter to me any more than if a congressman votes the right way out of principle or out of expediency.  I’d say if the world was full of angels we would not be need government but as I recall Satan started his career angelically.

So lets just say this:   if we are advancing conservative principles for the good of our country our society and children, that’s fine with me.

But remember we have only a short window to get this done, if we wait too long then we won’t be able to influence the GOP congress into conservatism, or the GOP candidates into conservatism, all we’ll be able to do is help Democrats win, which is’t the point of the exercise.

We get started now or we wait till Jan 2017.  There is not an acceptable 3rd choice.

*************************************

Our Fundraising Goal for 2015 at DaTechGuy blog is $22,000 (That’s only $60.28 a day) As of January 23rd we are $287 dollars toward that goal.  Just over 1%.

If you think this blog’s coverage and what we do here is worth your support please consider hitting DaTipJar below.

Consider Subscribing to support our lineup of  John Ruberry (Marathon Pundit)  on Sunday Pat Austin (And so it goes in Shreveport)  on Monday  Baldilocks (Tue & Sat) ,  AP Dillon (Lady Liberty1885) Thursdays, Pastor George Kelly Fridays,   Steve Eggleston on Saturdays with    and   Fausta  (Wed & Fri) of (Fausta Blog) also a Fabulous Fifty Blog winner

 

As a Massachusetts conservative watching the national media go wild about the election of a Republican Governor completely ignoring the lack of coattails (hell the lack of coat) is a source of frustration.

Charlie Baker is a nice guy and he means well but his election is not likely to have more than a cosmetic effect

The best way to explain the problem is to think of Baseball and the difference between buying a championship and building a dynasty.

In Massachusetts there are two conflicting views of the party, the establishment that is interested in the top of the ticket. It produces for those at the top patronage and excellent resume fodder in the hopes of getting a national political position.

Because of that goal they can’t take the time to build a farm team, every year that passes brings up a crop of people in Red States vying for those same jobs with resumes filled with actual positions in government.

They need that governorship today, they can’t wait around for the GOP to start winning seats in the statehouse, in fact a strong GOP controlled house and or senate will simply mean a crop of rivals with strong resumes in government as well.

Then there is the grass-roots Tea Party activists. They aren’t looking for a job from the government. They are looking to be able to keep their own jobs and business intact and be able to afford to have a decent life to raise their children here without either being hit in the pocketbook or because of their religious & social values.

For them it’s the bottom of the ticket that matters since until there is a change in the state senate and house all a GOP Governor can do is delay the day of reckoning.

So the idea is to start at Single A, city councilors, school committees. Recruit candidates to fill those spots. Then in four or five years those people can run for mayor, country offices, register of probate etc. the Double AA of electoral politics at the state level while a new grew group of people are recruited for the single A offices. After a few years the AA polls will start running in the state house and senate and positions like secretary of state & AG and within a few years viola you have a full slate of viable candidates not only for the Governor’s office but for congressional and senate seats.

Until the Massachusetts GOP decides to embrace the base GOP leaning votes will continue to leave the state and sooner or later there won’t be enough left to allow even a Republican as socially liberal as Charlie Baker won’t have a prayer ever again.

To you Baldrick the Renaissance was just something that happened to other people wasn’t it?

Rowan Atkinson Blackadder 2 1986

Remain Calm, all is well!

Keven Bacon Animal House 1978

It’s the week of te 4th of July and Joe & Mika have the week off so the panel today is Donnie Deutsch, Mike Barnicle, Jonathan Capeheart Mark Halperin and Alex Wagner..

As anyone who reads this blog knows, I’m a regular watcher of Morning Joe and being a full-blown conservative I’m pretty hard on Joe Scarborough and Mika, particularly Joe as are a lot of my fellow conservatives.

I tend to think however that he is VERY important because he is the one conduit that brings conservative thought to MSNBC viewers.

That truth is never more apparent than on the days he is not there such as today when the above mentioned panel talked about the Robert’s ruling and the effects on the election.

To the Morning Joe panel the only story was Romney had no plan, they were convinced that the lack of a solid Romney plan is the only issue and nobody is going to care about it in a few week. All during this harangue Mark Halperin sat there and quietly interjected the idea that this is going to have political consequences for the left.

It was as if I was watching the show two years ago, when until the Stewart Rally failed the message was all “the GOP needed to move to the left to win“. The lack of reality was so pronounced you even had Tim Kaine suggesting the purging of some of the Blue Dog Democrats would be a positive.

When Luke Russert came on set during the 6:30 half hour and bluntly said if the Republicans keep the house and win the Senate & White House, they WILL, not might, WILL repeal Obmaacare using reconciliation the entire group suddenly looked as if they were hit on the head, but only for a moment as they pivoted away from his opinion and Russert faded into the background.

What is going on? Well I see two possibilities which aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive:

1. The Obama White house understand that their only prayer is to keep the base believing so any suggestion that the Obamacare ruling is going to hurt badly in November can’t be expressed and the table is acting accordingly.

2. The people around the table are so insulated, and are so removed from the reality of the election they can’t conceive that the average voter or small business owner sees Obamacare in general and Obama in particular as a disaster.

If it propaganda or is it delusion, or is it just servicing that niche market that writes their checks? We will find out closer to election day when it becomes harder and harder to ignore reality as it approaches.

———-
The DaTechGuy Fundraiser is in progress, our goal is $3000 and any help is appreciated.

For details click here for the progress check the thermometer to the right and to kick in hit DaTipJar”.





Any guy who has been turned down for a date knows the social convention of coming up with some kind of excuse for not going out (instead of the much kinder “I’m just not interested”).

Claire McCaskill is the latest Democrat to decide that she will be waxing her legs that week.

She was among the first senators to endorse him over presumptive nominee Hillary Clinton in 2008, doing so just five days after Hillary’s big win in New Hampshire. That was a major vote of confidence in him coming from a key swing-state senator and prominent woman pol; Team Clinton “aggressively sought” her endorsement at the time but McCaskill stuck with Hopenchange. As recently as last October, notes National Journal, she was defiant in standing by her buddy O:

If she thought appearing with Obama would win her votes she would be there. If you don’t believe me will you believe the man in charge of electing democrats?

The man responsible for getting Democrats elected to the Congress this fall has a message for his party’s candidates: Stay away from the Democratic National Convention in September.

Listen, you can show me whatever poll you want, you can have any talking head you want pushing whatever message you want in the media but ACTION speak louder than words, and the Actions of the party says one thing to democrats.

Run away from your party!

Run away from this president!

So the GOP reaction should be this:


Ride Right Through them, they’re demoralized as Hell!

If we don’t take advantage of this, it’s our own fault

Update: The DaTechGuy Fundraiser is in progress, our goal is $3000 and any help is appreciated. For details click here for the progress check the thermometer to the right and to kick in hit DaTipJar”.





Via this tweet by Byron York:

…comes this very funny headline from the NYT:


A Campaign Challenge: Defining Obama

Defining Obama?. Hasn’t that game already been played?

The mainstream media helped smooth the way with the questions not asked, the history glossed over, the records sealed, the voices silenced by loyal Leftist Democrats. All had a hand in the deliberate cover-up. The American people were told how wonderful Barack Obama was, how articulate and educated, and just the remedy for an ailing nation, a nation that the Democrats said was scourged by the Republicans, so we had to get rid of them, and elect this anointed individual.

Everyone forgets that nobody knew who this guy was less than 10 years ago when he was embraced by the Democratic Elites alas even for that crowd the shine has worn off of it.

Over the Labor Day weekend, I went to a number of events in the Hamptons. At all of them, Obama was discussed. At none of them — that’s none — was he defended. That was remarkable. After all, sitting around various lunch and dinner tables were mostly Democrats. Not only that, some of them had been vociferous Obama supporters, giving time and money to his election effort. They were all disillusioned.

As a commentator said:

The only people defending Obama these days is the Secret Service.

But at least he’s not a Gauche tea partier like Rick Perry.

All this seems familiar somehow:

the GOP seems to be doing all it can to make itself unelectable, veering far to the right and embracing a tea party movement that, at its extremes, preaches the need for revolution.

That was E. J. Dionne in JUNE 2010 scoffing at GOP prospects in 2010. Right now when I see people saying Obama will trounce Perry or Bachmann or any tea party favorite I’m reminded that losing 39 seats (they lost 63 in 2010) was a pessimistic projection.

To such folks who watch MSNBC regularly the solution to the democratic political crisis is just a PR move away, but unlike 2008 the electorate knows what they’ve had, and no matter how they choose to define it, they just don’t like the dog food.

and you all know what that means:

“Ride right through them, they’re demoralized as hell”!

Update: Shirley you can’t be serious?

As Roxeanne pointed out yesterday Peter Durant won YET AGAIN in the Worcester 6th district this time by practically a landslide, 56 votes!

If I was a more cynical man I’d say this was the the deciding factor:

With observers from the U.S. Department of Justice in Southbridge looking to ensure the integrity of the ballot process…

Additionally people from the secretary of state’s office, Empower Massachusetts,and the Tea party were on hand to keep an eye on what was going on.

Democrats only had a single seat in play, as opposed to races that they were worried about up and down the ballot so a clean election isn’t expensive, but consider; even with two ringers independent candidates in the race Durant wins by 56 votes as opposed to 1.

Republican Peter J. Durant of Spencer last night ended state Rep. Geraldo Alicea’s tenure at two terms with an apparent 3,325-to-3,269 victory in a special election for the 6th Worcester District House seat.

Independent Peter J. Boria of Charlton placed a distant third with 1,275 votes, but finished second in his hometown. Independent Robert J. Cirba of Spencer had 71 votes.

I suspect the Telegram story concerning the Southbridge city clerk easily cost Alicea enough votes to lose, but if you really want to find the difference in this race it’s this figure:

6,587

That’s each candidate’s total vote in November.  That means that 5234 fewer votes were cast than last time around.

Now I suspect there was some funny business going on last fall, but I’m pretty sure that it didn’t amount to 39% of the total vote.

Even if we rashly assume that every one of the votes for the two ringers independent candidates would have gone to Durant that means that 1916 Durant voters didn’t show up and 3309 Alicea votes didn’t show up.

If you are a democrat unhappy with this result but didn’t vote yesterday, blame yourself.  If you are a Durant supporter who voted in November but stayed home yesterday all I have to say is, you’re damn lucky.

My first meeting with Ann Marie Burekle was the day that Syracuse Post-Standard declared that she was down double digits. The poll itself was suspect but as my friend Robert Stacy McCain often says Polls aren’t elections. (this is what I constantly remind those who say Palin can’t win due to a poll that the election isn’t held today) That day Ann Marie said this:

(UPDATE video added)

Now forgetting that the poll was…shall we say interesting all that poll proved in the end was one (or both) of two things.

The Syracuse Post-Standard had an agenda

Ann Marie Buerkle worked incredibly hard and managed to turn it around in two weeks

I thought of that last night when I saw this story that leftist blogs have been jumping on:

New poll undercuts GOP claims of a midterm mandate

By Steven Thomma | McClatchy Newspapers

A majority of Americans want the Congress to keep the new health care law or actually expand it, despite Republican claims that they have a mandate from the people to kill it, according to a new McClatchy-Marist poll.

I don’t know Steven Thomma, he may be a good writer and a nice guy and kind to animals but I know this much. He is trying to BS me and the left blogs are doing the same.

We just had an election where Republicans running against Obamacare won more seats than anyone has seen in over 50 years and you are trying to tell me there is no mandate because of your poll? As I left in comments:

Yeah all those 63 or 64 congressional seats mean nothing next to a POLL

how stupid do you think we are?

Apparently they think we are pretty stupid. Lucky for people who are not suckers we have Robert Stacy McCain at the American Spectator who isn’t buying it. His piece is called The Republican Mandate:

Those people did make a difference, and in the process made laughingstocks of pundits who said they couldn’t do it, chief among them E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post.

“It will be very hard for Republicans to take the House if they don’t break the Democrats’ power in the Northeast — and they still have to prove they can do that,” Dionne wrote five weeks before Election Day, in a column that featured this quote from Dan Maffei: “When we do retain the majority… people are going to look at the map and see that the Northeast held.” Dionne predicted: “Absent a Republican wave of historic proportions, [Maffei’s] seat now seems out of the GOP’s reach.”

Unfortunately for Maffei and Dionne, that “Republican wave of historic proportions” came crashing ashore Nov. 2 with enough power to flip six seats in New York into the GOP column. In addition to Buerkle’s hard-fought win in the 25th District, Republicans also captured previously Democrat-held seats in the 13th, 19th, 20th, 24th and 29th districts. New York’s six GOP pickups was the most of any state. Republicans gained five seats in Ohio and Pennsylvania, while adding four seats in both Florida and Illinois. If such widespread victories are not a mandate for House Republicans to oppose the Democrats’ liberal agenda, whatever could be?

How did two guys in fedoras know to visit Ny-25 in October when EJ Dionne who unlike me doesn’t have to go door to door to business to pay for his radio show? We went there any saw for ourselves!

If you choose to believe Steven Thomma and McClatchy that is your prerogative. Just don’t expect us to believe or trust your opinion

And yes this will be a topic on Saturday.

Update: Put the actual video in

After long day of promoting the show door to door it’s nice to come home to good news like this:

Finally, after weeks of canvassing, absentee ballot counting, and legal challenges, Rep. Dan Maffei (D) has conceded to Ann Marie Buerkle (R) in the NY25 race.

A press conference is scheduled for 4PM today.

Ann Marie is a treasure and I didn’t realize her pro-life credentials were so strong

Remember that (a) Buerkle was endorsed by Sarah Palin, and (b) Buerkle is pro-life and was a former spokeswoman for Operation Rescue.

I wonder what Morning Joe will say about this race where Palin endorsed and nobody outside of Me Stacy and the Lonely Conservative thought was a winner?

Ann Marie is a fine woman and will be an even finer representative, I just wish more of the stories were “Ann Marie Wins” rather than Maffei concedes.

There is also good news of a non political nature as not only is BBC America going to be showing the Dr. Who Proms this year but the Christmas Special actually be shown, on Christmas.

BBC America have confirmed they will be showing the 2010 Doctor Who Prom on Christmas Day, the same day they show the 2010 Christmas Special A Christmas Carol.

And if that’s not enough the new preview of the Christmas special is out:

Is that awesome or what?

Oh and today some blogger out of Tennessee you might have heard of has confirmed as a guest for January 15th show.

Now if the potential customer whose ads I’m now writing like them then my cup will runneth over even more.