Saying there’s no way Democrats can keep control of the House, Ireland’s largest bookie on Wednesday said it has already paid off all bettors who wagered the GOP would capture the chamber.
“In our opinion this race is well and truly over with nothing short of a miracle stopping the Republicans taking down the House,” said Ken Robertson, communications manager for Paddy Power, the Irish bookmaker.
Of course, that begs the question: Just how many people in Ireland bet on U.S. election outcomes? It could very well be that the number is so small, paying them off prematurely might be more than offset by the anticipated additional business from publicity for making the announcement.
Either way, as Instapundit has repeatedly warned, “Don’t get cocky.” It’s only five days until the election, and election fatigue has already set in for many. (Hell, even I’m starting to get tired of writing about it.) Election night should provide plenty of reasons to celebrate, but only if people execute in the last five days, a period that can be surprisingly long in politics, especially if Democrats are planning an ever-popular October Surprise. Remember that at this point in 2000, Democrats hadn’t even unleashed their Bush DWI smear yet. Expect to hear that presumptive Speaker of the House John Boehner is a cross-dressing furry porn addict sometime this weekend.
This Frank J. Fleming piece over on Pajamas Media is too funny (and dead on) not to quote copious sections from:
So the Democrats sucked. But not just plain old, usual politician sucked, but epic levels of suck where it’s hard to find an analogue in human history that conveys the same level of suckitude. It was sheer incompetence plus arrogance — and those things do not complement each other well. We’re talking sucking that distorts time and space like a black hole.
It’s Godzilla-smashing-through-a-city level of suck — but a really patronizing Godzilla who says you’re just too stupid and hateful to see all the buildings he’s saved or created as he smashes everything apart. Or, to use Obama’s favorite analogy, you have a car stuck in ditch, so you call the mechanic, but the only tool he brings with him is a sledgehammer. And then he smashes your car to pieces and charges you $100,000 for his service. Finally, he calls you racist for complaining. Obama and the Democrats have been so awful, it’s hard for the human brain to even comprehend.
But the Democrats will counter that the Republicans also suck. And while this is true, it’s not really going to help them. As I pointed out before, both a dog incessantly barking and a zombie apocalypse are things that everyone would agree suck. Yet no one during a zombie apocalypse, while hiding out in a boarded up mall, would turn to the other survivors and say, “We don’t want to kill all the zombies; then we’d have to go back to being woken up at night by that annoying dog next door.” But this is the best argument the Democrats can come up with. “Remember how awful the Republicans and Bush were? You hated them. You don’t want to go back to that.” Yes, why would people want to go back to when 6% unemployment was considered high?
People do remember how much the Republicans suck, and they know where it tops out … and that is nowhere near as bad as the Democrats are today. Like with the barking dog, it’s annoying, but you know it’s not going to cause the collapse of civilization as we know it. Not so with the zombie apocalypse; who knows how bad that could get if left to continue? Same with the Democrats and Obama; people have never dealt with anything this horrible their entire lives, and they aren’t that curious to see how much worse it can be.
So the Republicans kinda suck, and that’s why they’re going to win huge this November. Because in the land of epic, mega, ultra, apocalyptic levels of sucking, those who kinda suck are king.
Here’s the complete text of his press release, since I can’t imagine the Williamson County Democratic Party letting his press release stay up, here it is in its entirety:
Georgetown, Texas – Recently elected Democratic Chairman, Gregory S Windham, announced his resignation from the Chairmanship today citing differences of opinion over the State and National Democratic Agenda and support of a Republican candidate as his reasons.
A Message to Democrats
It is quite apparent that many members of the Williamson County Democratic Party leadership are interested in following a more liberal national agenda than listening to the majority of their constituents here locally. As a fifth-generation Texan and longtime supporter of Conservative, Texas principles, I find myself isolated within the party ranks and unable to relay my message of fiscal responsibility, family values, free-markets, and fair play.
The divisive, rigid leadership with the State and local party have made it clear from the beginning of this term that they have no interest in my opinions; engaging in personal name calling, the marginalization of the Chair’s voice, and claiming my Texas ideals are out of touch.
I have a hatred of tyranny and contempt for its tools and being that I cannot sit down quietly and allow my mind be used for the spreading of an agenda that will further divide our citizenry, I choose now to resign as Chairman.
I give heartfelt thanks to my many supporters whose tireless work helped me get elected to this position. I am sincere in my hopes that Williamson County residents will take control of the political process from the many hand picked representatives of the left who now hold the keys to our political process.
After several opportunities to hear the candidates for State House Rep 52, I have decided to support Larry Gonzales as the next Williamson County State Representative. Larry’s experience, intelligence, and knowledge of the political process far exceed that of the Democratic candidate. He is a family man, business owner, and a gentleman willing to build bridges and represent his district rather than his party.
Texas and America are facing a perfect storm. We must work together, hand in hand, to guide our way to safe shores. The continual mockery of each others positions and platforms only deepens our internal wounds. Compromise is necessary and I urge all who have interest in Liberty and a zeal for truth to listen carefully to all opinions and, above all, practice the Golden Rule.
Joseph Donnelly vs. Jackie Walorski for Indiana’s second congressional district.
Barney Frank vs. ex-Marine Sean Bielat for Massachusetts’ Fourth Congressional District.
Republicans aren’t leading all those races, and there’s no guarantee they’ll actually win the ones they are leading, and even beyond that there’s no guarantee that if they do win, it will be outside the margin of the usual Democratic fraud.
Says Geraghty:
My current assessment is in line with the conventional wisdom: Roughly 100 seats are in play under the broader definition, and it’s hard to see Republicans winning fewer than 40 of them. The ceiling depends on how angry the country is on November 2, but it is pretty darn high . . . 60? 70? 80?
The possible peak of the wave keeps getting larger…
So here are some long-shot campaigns for the seats of particularly egregious incumbent House Democrats that just might fall the GOP’s way in this election:
Jerry Costello of Illinois vs. Teri Newman for Illinois 12th Congressional District. (Teri, here’s a free hint: Auto-running movies with sound on your website isn’t going to win you any votes.) Costello is a Stupak bloc flip-flopper who voted for the Stimulus, but against TARP and Cap-and-Trade.
Joseph Donnelly vs. Jackie Walorski for Indiana’s second congressional district. Donnelly is another Stupak bloc flip-flopper, and also voted for TARP and the Stimulus, but against ObamaCare. Walorski has been endorsed by Sarah Palin, so she might well have more money and attention than others on this list.
Lloyd Doggett vs. Dr. Donna Campbell for the Texas 25th congressional district. Having endured having old liberal warhorse Lloyd Doggett as my Representative back when I still lived within the confines of The People’s Republic of Austin, I would be delighted to see a Republican take Doggett out. Doggett voted against TARP, but for the Stimulus, Cap-and-Trade, and ObamaCare. One issue in the campaign is Doggett’s writing language into federal law to deprive Texas of almost a billion dollars in federal education funds. In this Human Events piece on the race, Campbell notes that Doggett “voted 98% of the time with Nancy Pelosi. And him getting in again, is one more vote that keeps Pelosi in.”
Charlie Rangel vs. Michael Faulkner for New York’s 15th congressional district. Rangel is, of course, a corrupt scumbag. (The question of whether he’s the most corrupt scumbag in the House I’ll leave as an exercise for the reader.) Like Al Sharpton, he has a certain amount of venomous charm. Unlike Sharpton, he’s actually been elected. Like Frank, Rangel has a perfect liberal record in voting for TARP, the Stimulus, Cap-and-Trade, and ObamaCare. Faulkner has a good bit of name recognition from being a former New York Jets football player. The differences between Faulkner and Rangel are legion (not least of which is my working assumption that Faulkner isn’t a corrupt scumbag), but one of particular local interest may play a role if this race becomes the upset of all upsets: Rangel supports the Ground Zero Mosque while Faulkner opposes it. Polling for the race is non-existent (Democrats outnumber Republicans 15-1), but at least some observers think it might be more competitive than expected.
Remember, in 1994 no one expected Speaker of the House Tom Foley’s race to be even remotely competitive, but George Nethercutt still beat him, and there are some observers who say it could very well be much worse for Democrats this year than 1994. If that’s the case, then it’s a good bet one or more of the Republican candidates listed above will pull off an upset.
Number of people in Rep. Jim Oberstar’s Minnesota Eighth Congressional District: 614,935
Number of individuals in his District who donated to Oberstar’s election campaign this year: 1
I’ve long thought that limiting campaign contributions to in-district or in-state might radically cut down on special interest abuse, and Rep. Oberstar is now the poster-child for that notion.
(BTW, Oberstar racked up a perfect liberal 4×4 record by voting for for TARP, the Stimulus, Cap-and Trade and ObamaCare.)
I’m not sure if you noticed, but National Review Online has put up a new blog, Battle ’10, for this year’s elections. It’s well worth checking out if you want to follow various races. (And I’m not saying that just because they linked to me.)
So right after I put this piece on vulnerable Democratic House seats, this New York Times story appears stating that three of the Dem Reps we profiled, Steve Driehaus (OH 1), Suzanne Kosmas (FL 24) and Kathy Dahlkemper (PA 3) have been “triaged” and will no longer receive national Democratic TV advertising buys. As I noted yesterday, all three flipped their ObamaCare votes from No to Yes, two of them (Driehaus and Dahlkemper) as theoretically Pro-Life members of Bart Stupak’s bloc.
So the same party that pressured them to abandon their “deeply held beliefs” to pass ObamaCare is now tossing each of them aside like a used condom. I hope they enjoy the sour lemony tang of those just deserts.
The Times piece goes on to state that the Democrats are now targeting ad buys for Rep. Charles Wilson (OH 6) (not to be confused with late Texas Rep. “Goodtime” Charlie Wilson, of anti-Communist fame), another Stupak-bloc flipper who was not on that list of 72 endangered Democrats, which would indicate there are fewer and fewer “safe” Democratic seats in this election. In addition to ObamaCare, Wilson voted for TARP and the Stimulus, but against Cap-and-Trade. Wilson’s opponent is Bill Johnson, who’s drawn endorsements from Sarah Palin and other GOP heavy hitters.
Although it’s always wise to heed Instapundit’s “don’t get cocky” advice, I like the way Power and Control’s M. Simon Rockford put it: “Republicans at 100+ House seats is looking better every day.”
So how bad are Democratic House members doing this election? According to the National Journal, pretty bad. They count 60 seats among the most competitive and another 19 very close. Of those 79 House seats in play, 72 are currently held by Democrats.
As for where Democrats are spending their money, six of the seven districts the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is spending money on went for Obama by more that 54%. They say that they’re trying to “nail down” relatively easy seats before moving on to harder ones, but that makes absolutely no sense; if you really want to help the marginal seats, you start helping them out first, because they need the most work. No, this smacks of triage, and suggests that the DCCC considers most districts below that line as good as gone.
There are a number of interesting races and names that should be familiar to regular BattleSwarm readers, either from being in Texas or having been mentioned here before:
Chet Edwards (TX 17) comes in at #7. (I would say that Edwards is the last remnant of the old Texas Blue Dogs, but I didn’t know that Henry Cueller (TX-28) was an actual member of the Blue Dog Collation, which Edwards is not.) Edwards voted against ObamaCare and Cap-and-Trade, but did vote for the Stimulus and the TARP bank bailout. District is heavily Republican; went for Bush by 68% in 2000, 70% in 2004, and 67% for McCain. His opponent is Bill Flores.
Suzanne Kosmas (FL 24) comes in at #9 on the list. You may remember this BattleSwarm piece on her back when she was a wavering no vote on ObamaCare; as I predicted, she was easier to flip to a Yes vote that Rep. Jason Altmire (PA 4), who I also profiled, and who stuck to his no vote. Which goes a long way toward explaining why Kosmas is likely to lose her seat, while Altmire isn’t on the list of endangered Democrats. Go figure. She also voted for the Stimulus and Cap-and-Trade. (Kosmos was first elected in 2008, so she didn’t vote on TARP.) District went for Bush in 2000 by 53%, Bush in 2004 by 55%, and McCain by 52%. Her opponent is Sandy Adams.
Indiana’s open 8th congressional district, held by Brad Ellsworth, who is leaving for a Senate run (which polls show he’s currently losing by 17 points), comes in at #11. The contest is between Democrat Trent Van Haaften and Republican Larry Bucshon. Ellsworth was of the theoretically Pro-Life members of the Bart Stupak bloc that rolled over for Nancy Pelosi on ObamaCare. District went for Bush by 57% in 2000, 62% in 2004, and for McCain by 51%.
Steve Driehaus (OH 1) comes in at #16. Another Stupak-blocer who rolled over to let Nancy Pelosi rub his furry belly. In addition to ObamaCare, he voted for the Stimulus and Cap-and-Trade. (He was elected in 2008, and so didn’t vote on TARP.) District went 51% for Bush in both 2000 and 2004, but only 44% for McCain. His opponent is Steve Chabot, who held the seat for 12 years before Driehaus edged him 52%-48% in the Obama wave of 2008.
Kathy Dahlkemper (PA 3) comes in at #20. Yet another turncoat Supak-blocer Pelosi flipped for ObamaCare. Also voted for the Stimulus but against Cap-and-Trade. Wasn’t in Congress when TARP was voted on. District voted 51% for Bush in 2000 and 53% in 2004, and McCain edged Obama by a mere 20 votes in 2008. Her opponent is Mike Kelly.
Speaking of Stupak, Michigan’s open 1st congressional district comes in at #35. Realizing that his betrayal of his Pro-Life position to pass ObamaCare made him electoral toast, Stupak declined to run for reelection, leaving the battle to Democrat Gary McDowell and Republican doctor Dan Benishek. District went for Bush by 52% in 2000 and 53% in 2004, but 50% for Obama.
Ciro Rodriguez (TX-23) is off the list of top 60 races, but shows up in the “Knocking on the Door” section. Another Stupak bloc turncoat. In addition to ObammaCare, he voted for the Stimulus, but against Cap-and-trade and TARP. His district went for Bush by 54% in 200 and 57% in 2004, but for Obama by 51%. His opponent is Francisco “Quico” Canseco. Rodriguez came to national attention recently thanks to his defensive tone when constituents asked him to defend his vote on ObamaCare:
Time permitting, I’ll try to do additional posts on each of those races, plus a few others (including some longer shots that just might pay off in a tidal wave year). But if you’re looking for places your campaign contributions might be the most effective at unseating Democrats, the challengers linked to above are certainly worthy of your consideration.