Posts Tagged ‘ObamaCare’

ObamaCare Votes Doomed Democrats

Wednesday, November 10th, 2010

I’m sure the average BattleSwarm reader came to this conclusion heretofore, but Derek Thompson provides a statistical roundup in The Atlantic that proves it. They also find lesser effects for the other three votes I’ve highlighted here (Stimulus, TARP, and Cap-and-Trade):

For Democrats in the least Democratic districts, the model suggests a loss of about 4 percent for every yes vote. If vulnerable Democrats hadn’t voted for any of the four bills, he concludes, Democrats would have won 32 more seats, enough to retain control of the House. Even after you remove TARP (which was a must-vote in scary times), the three-vote impact was 24 seats — not enough to keep the House, but close.

Although at least one study he cites shows no effect for the last that can’t be explained for the other three.

But it all comes back to what all non-liberal Americans have been telling Democrats for a year or longer: It’s the ObamaCare, stupid.

Post Election Analysis: Bart Stupak’s Turncoats Go Down in Flames

Wednesday, November 3rd, 2010

One of the most satisfying results of last night’s election was just how many of Bart Stupak’s block of ObamaCare flippers went down in flames.

If you remember back to the ObamaCare debates, Stupak’s bloc of “Pro-Life Democrats” was never, ever, ever, ever going to vote for a bill that included government funding of abortions. That is, right up until they did.

As shown below, on November 2, the clear majority of them paid the price for betraying their principles as well as their constituents. Unless otherwise noted, the election margins below are taken from this CBS table. Since WordPress doesn’t let me set font colors to red, I’ve marked GOP pickups in bold.

  • Rep. Jerry Costello of Illinois’ 12th district defeated Republican Teri Newman
  • Rep. Joseph Donnelly of Indiana’ 2nd district edged Republican Jackie Walorski by less than 3,000 votes.
  • Rep. Brad Ellsworth left his Indiana’s 8th Congressional seat for an unsuccessful run for the Senate. Republican Larry Bucshon flipped the seat by defeating Trent Van Haaften by almost 40,000 votes.
  • Rep. Bart Stupak retired from Michigan’s 1st congressional district when it became apparent his ObamaCare betrayal doomed his electoral chances. Republican Dan Benishek flipped the seat by defeating Gary McDowell by 25,000 votes.
  • Rep. James Oberstar of Minnesota lost to Republican Chip Cravaack. You may also remember Oberstar for racking up only a single in-district donation to his reelection campaign.
  • Rep. Steve Driehaus of Ohio’s 1st district lost to Republican Steve Chabot by 23,000 votes.
  • Rep. Charles Wilson of Ohio’s 6th district lost to Republican Bill Johnson by 10,000 votes.
  • Rep. Marcy Kaptur of Ohio’s 9th district beat James Iott (AKA Nazi Costume Guy) by a wide margin.
  • Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper of Pennsylvania’s 3rd district lost to Republican Mike Kelly by over 20,000 votes.
  • Rep. Paul Kanjorski of Pennsylvania’s 11th district lost to Lou Barletta by over 15,000 votes.
  • Rep. Solomon Ortiz of Texas’ 27th district loses to Republican Blake Farenthold by less than 1,000 votes.

That’s eight out of eleven Stupak bloc flippers whose seats are now in the hands of the GOP. And of those eleven races, I correctly picked ten, missing only Donnelly’s narrow victory in Indiana’s second district (which I originally had down as a longshot).

A few lessons:

  1. Voters hate ObamaCare.
  2. They hate congressmen who break promises. (Republicans should take special note of this one anytime they contemplate letting a GOP-controlled congress slip back to the old free-spending ways of the Bush43 years.)
  3. They hate Blue Dog Democrats who vote like liberals when the really important issues are on the line.
  4. Voters may be wising up to the fact that it doesn’t matter how much a Democrat swears up and down how Pro-Life, fiscally conservative, pro-gun, etc. they are; when push comes to shove, they’ll always cave in and vote with their liberal leadership.

As a reward for laying down their careers in the cause of ObamaCare, at least Blue Dogs have the consolation of the respect and gratitude of liberal activists everywhere. Ha, just kidding. The Daily Kossacks are saying “we can do without their sabotage.”

Oh yes, I’m sure that running Democrats ideologically closer to Nancy Pelosi than Dan Boren in places like Indiana, Pennsylvania and Ohio is a great way to pick up seats. I encourage you to get started on that right away.

BattleSwarm Blog’s Election Prediction for 2010: GOP Gains 67 House Seats, 10 Senate Seats

Monday, November 1st, 2010

With the election tomorrow, I thought it was high time to offer up my own election predictions.

I have carefully and scientifically evaluated each and every House and Senate race, taking into account length of incumbency, previous voting trends for each district and state, fund-raising advantage, the most recent polls, and the fact that every preceding clause in this sentence prior to this one has been a complete and utter lie.

I have looked at a lot of polls and data but damn, there are only so many hours in the day. My predictions are based on general national mood, gut-feeling, and detailed looks at trends for select races.

This is going to be worse for the Democrats than 1994. The rise of the Netroots and the overwhelming support among the traditional news media dangerously blinded liberal insiders from how badly out-of-sync with the rest of the country they had become, and their insistence to push onward with ObamaCare despite widespread opposition and a lousy economy turned what was already going to be a bad year for them into a once-in-a-lifetime political slaughter.

I predict that the Democrats will lose 67 House seats.

As I admitted above, that’s not a wild-assed guess, but a guestimate based on current polling data and news on individual races. I don’t see Republicans gaining less than 50 seats, and there’s an outside possibility they could get 100. To my mind, it’s much more likely they’ll gain more than 67 than less than 50.

Among the individual House races, I predict all the Stupak-bloc flippers except Marcy Kaptur (who had the luck to draw Nazi Uniform Guy as her opponent) and Jerry Costello (much as I appreciate GOP candidate Teri Newman popping in to say the race is tied, I just don’t see any traction at all in a 54% Obama district; I’d love to be surprised) will lose, including:

  1. Rep. Joseph Donnelly of Indiana
  2. Indiana’s open 8th congressional district (formerly held by Brad Ellsworth)
  3. Michigan’s open 1st congressional seat (formerly held by Bart Stupak)
  4. James Oberstar of Minnesota
  5. Steve Driehaus of Ohio
  6. Charles Wilson of Ohio
  7. Kathy Dahlkemper of Pennsylvania
  8. Paul Kanjorski of Pennsylvania
  9. Solomon Ortiz of Texas

Additionally, I’m predicting that all of the following Democrats representing districts that voted for McCain in 2008 lose their jobs:

  1. Bobby Bright of Alabama
  2. Arkansas’ open 1st congressional district (formerly held by Marion Barry (AKA “the other Marion Barry”))
  3. Arkansas’ open 2nd congressional district (formerly held by Vic Snyder)
  4. Ann Kirkpatrick of Arizona
  5. Harry Mitchell of Arizona
  6. Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona
  7. John Salazar of Colorado
  8. Betsy Markey of Colorado
  9. Allen Boyd of Florida
  10. Suzanne Kosmas of Florida
  11. Jim Marshall of Georgia
  12. Baron Hill of Indiana
  13. Ben Chandler of Kentucky
  14. Louisiana’s open 3rd congressional district (formerly held by Charlie Melancon)
  15. Frank Kratovil of Maryland
  16. Ike Skelton of Missouri
  17. Travis Childers of Mississippi
  18. Gene Taylor of Mississippi
  19. Mike McIntyre of North Carolina
  20. Heath Schuler of North Carolina
  21. Earl Pomeroy of North Dakota
  22. Harry Teague of New Mexico
  23. Michael McMahon of New York
  24. New York’s open 29th congressional district (formerly held by Eric Massa)
  25. John Boccieri of Ohio
  26. Zack Space of Ohio
  27. Christopher Carney of Pennsylvania
  28. Mark Critz of Pennsylvania (serving the remainder of the late John P. Murtha’s term)
  29. John Spratt of South Carolina
  30. Stephanie Sandlin of South Dakota
  31. Lincoln Davis of Tennessee
  32. Tennessee’s open 6th congressional district (formerly held by Bart Gordon)
  33. Tennessee’s open 8th congressional district (formerly held by John Tanner)
  34. Chet Edwards of Texas
  35. Tom Perriello of Virginia
  36. Rick Boucher of Virginia
  37. West Virgina’s first district (held by Allan Mollohan, who was defeated in the Democratic primaries)

That’s 46 seats right there, and I think there’s easily another 21 seats to be had in districts that went narrowly for Obama in 2008 to provide the final margin of victory.

I predict that the Democrats will lose 10 Senate seats.

The Senate is a tougher nut to flip this year, and as I set down to gauge Republican chances, I was shocked to find that, despite insider predictions, I actually had them winning ten seats to take control of the Senate. Running down the Senate races that Real Clear Politics shows as tossups I was only getting nine seats, but then I remembered that Blanche Lincoln is losing so badly in Arkansas that they had that down as a safe Republican flip.

Republicans should take over the following ten Senate seats:

  1. Arkansas
  2. Colorado
  3. Illinois
  4. Indiana
  5. Kentucky
  6. Nevada
  7. Pennsylvania
  8. Washington
  9. West Virginia
  10. Wisconsin

Much as I’d like to see an upset in California, I don’t see Carly Fiorina getting any traction in an overwhelmingly blue state; I think the out-migration of California’s best and brightest due to the high tax rates, crummy economy, the overwhelmingly powerful public sector unions and a near-bankrupt government (all related phenomena) has, ironically, made Californian even bluer.

The two races of the ten that will be most difficult for Republicans to pull off are Washington and West Virginia. Washington may be the tightest, simply because the Left Coast is so blue, but Rossi has been steadily gaining on Murray, and actually pulled ahead in the latest PPP poll. And PPP usually has a Democratic bias, so in a wave election, you have to give it to the Republican if polling is within the margin of error.

In West Virginia, I’m going to go out on a limb and predict a victory for Republican John Raese even though Joe Manchin is up four points in the most recent poll, for the following reasons:

  • McCain won West Virginia by 13.1 points in 2008, which was four points above the poll RCP average. Asking Manchin to run 14 points better in 2010 than Obama did in 2008 is a pretty tall order.
  • The state has been trending Republican for years. It went for Clinton over both Bush41 and Dole, but for Bush43 over Gore by 6.3%, and Bush43 over Kerry by 12.9%.
  • West Virginia fits the classic demographic pattern for “Reagan Democrats”: It’s 94.4% white, and is relatively rural and blue collar, and with a household income significantly below the national average. Those are the very voters that are abandoning Democrats this year.
  • Along those same lines, Hillary Clinton beat Obama handily here in 2008, even though Obama had all but clinched the nomination at the time. West Virginia voters fit the classic “Jacksonian” profile, the portions of the Democratic base that has been most alienated by Obama’s policies.
  • Say what you will about the late Senator Robert Byrd, but he was extraordinarily popular in his home state right up to the end. But his name isn’t on the top of the ballot this time around, and without that reminder of their old “born and bred” Democratic allegiance to remind them, 2010 may finally be the year when remaining West Virginia conservative Democrats make the switch to the GOP.
  • The areas that have been most fruitful for Democratic fraud efforts in the past have been urban enclaves with strong Democratic minority machine politics, which are pretty much absent here.
  • Logic dictates that if that this truly is a nationalized “wave” election, it will show up strongly here.

Honestly, I think the Democrats taking the Washington senate seat is more likely that West Virginia.

So the Republicans take both House and Senate in an electoral slaughter unprecedented in modern times. So I have foretold, and so it shall be!

And if you disagree, post your own predictions below.

Republicans Suck Less

Wednesday, October 20th, 2010

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.

(Hat tip: Instapundit.)

Why did Maryland Trail Lawyer Mel Sykes give Ciro Rodriguez $2,350?

Monday, October 18th, 2010

No, really, I want to know. And though I have donated to Rodriguez’s opponent Francisco Canseco (more coverage of the race here), I don’t mean that in an ominous, scary voice-over attack ad sort of way. I’m genuinely curious.

I believe that this is the Mel Sykes in question. He seems to be involved in Asbestos and mesothelioma litigation, among other things.

Looking through that list of Rodriguez contributors, a lot of the donations are pretty typical for an incumbent Democratic congressman. Lots of donations from local business leaders, plus lots of money from DC lobbyists, such as:

And, of course, lots of money from unions.

Those I all understand. Those are fairly typical Democratic incumbent donations. But Sykes seems to be an actual litigator rather than a lobbyist. And according to Rodriguez’s official congressional website:

Today Congressman Rodriguez serves on the House Committee on Appropriations where he sits on the Homeland Security; Transportation, Housing & Urban Development & Related Agencies; and Legislative Branch Subcommittees. He also sits on the House Committee on Veterans Affairs where he is a member of the Subcommittee on Health and the Subcommittee on Assistance & Memorial Affairs. Congressman Rodriguez remains a member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) where he serves as the Chair of the Taskforce on Agriculture and Rural Communities.

Maybe I’m just ignorant of the inner workings of some of those committees, but none seem directly related to mesothelioma or general litigation, which would (I believe) fall under the purview of the Committee on Education and Labor’s Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions Subcommittee and the House Judiciary Committee, neither of which Rodriguez appears to be on.

Granted, trail lawyers (like Big Labor) love Democratic incumbents. But why the donations from this particular Maryland lawyer to Ciro Rodriguez? If you have any idea, post below or email me.

(One of the most disappointing things about pursuing Rodrigeuz’s donor list is the fact that former Republican congressman and current lobbyist Jack Fields gave him $2,000, a sad example of William F. Buckley’s aphorism that “By the time one of our people get into a position of power, they’re no longer one of our people.”)

Select Long-Shot House Campaigns

Thursday, October 14th, 2010

A few days ago I covered a handful of the most competitive House races. With tides moving so strongly against the Democrats, now would be a good time to look at some House races that Republicans might view as hopeless in any other year.

But this year, all bets are off.

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.”
  • Barney Frank vs. ex-Marine Sean Bielat for Massachusetts’ Fourth Congressional District. Frank is as much responsible as anyone in the House for helping create the current recession by his steadfast opposition to tightening regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac at the same time he was having an affair with Fannie Mae executive Herb Moses. Frank, as you would expect, has a perfect liberal record in voting for TARP, the Stimulus, Cap-and-Trade, and ObamaCare. Here’s a Wall Street Journal piece on the race.
  • 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.

Selected House Democrats Who May Be Swamped By The Coming Tidal Wave

Monday, October 11th, 2010

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%.
  • Paul Kanjorski (PA 11) comes in at #15. Another Stupak bloc turncoat. Voted for TARP. Voted in favor of the Stimulus, but evidently decided oversight was so unimportant that he that he only attended three of the ten Pennsylvania Stimulus Oversight Board meetings. Has a reputation as a big spender: “Asking Paul Kanjorski to make sure our tax dollars are being spent wisely is like asking John Dillinger to keep an eye on the bank safe.” (IBID). Yesterday’s LinkSwarm mentioned how he earmarked $10 million for a business run by his own family. District went 54% for Gore, 53% for Kerry, and 57% for Obama. His opponent is Lou Barletta.
  • 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.

References

71% of Missouri Voters Oppose ObamaCare

Wednesday, August 4th, 2010

Those numbers aren’t from an opinion poll, they’ve from actual voting results on Proposition C.

Missouri is often considered a political bellwether state. It went for McCain in 2008, but only by .1% of the vote.

If ObamaCare is this unpopular nationwide, then Democrats are in for a world of hurt come November.

LinkSwarm for July 19, 2010

Monday, July 19th, 2010

A few random links to kick off your week:

  • Wondering how congressional candidates are doing in the fundraising sweepstakes? This handy chart provides the lowdown.
  • If you wanted to make conservatives and libertarians paranoid, how would you go about it? How about sneaking a provision into ObamaCare requiring dealers to report all gold and silver purchases? But what’s the big deal? It’s not like a Democratic President ever ordered the seizure of American’s gold before. Oh wait, yes he did.
  • Europe is even more screwed than most of us think.
  • For a look at where ObamaCare is leading us, take a look at Massachusetts.
  • This story is about a guy’s horrible experience buying a used Saturn. I’m linking to it here because along the way it provides a pretty sobering look at the parts of the Hope and Change Economy that the usual media sources don’t cover:

    I immediately began looking for work, but by this point the recession was in full swing and over half the yards on our street had ‘For Sale’ signs up. In fact, the town of Marion, SC has lost nearly 30% of its residential population since January, 2009. There were no jobs within two hours of the town and any jobs that were available were swamped with applications. The high school put up a notice that they were looking for two custodians. They had over 600 people show up for applications. The unemployment rate was over 50%, but people like myself, who didn’t qualify for unemployment benefits, and people on welfare, don’t go on the national unemployment statistic. It’s only for people receiving unemployment checks. Those who didn’t comprised such a huge chunk of that ratio, that the official statistic only stated a 19% unemployment rate for the PeeDee region of South Carolina. Yeah, MSNBC didn’t mention the fine points of that statistic, did they?

(Hat tips: Instapundit, Real Clear Politics, Fark)

Republicans to Gain 100 Seats in House?

Wednesday, April 14th, 2010

Sean Trende at Real Clear Politics suggests that Democrats could be in for a bigger shellacking this November than the suffered even in 1994.

A 1994-style scenario is probably the most likely outcome at this point. Moreover, it is well within the realm of possibility – not merely a far-fetched scenario – that Democratic losses could climb into the 80 or 90-seat range. The Democrats are sailing into a perfect storm of factors influencing a midterm election, and if the situation declines for them in the ensuing months, I wouldn’t be shocked to see Democratic losses eclipse 100 seats.

He foresees a bad economy, a controversial agenda (i.e, the deep unpopularity of runway spending in general and ObamaCare in specific) and the reversal of the 2006-2008 Democratic wins in traditionally Republican districts combining for a perfect storm of voter anger directed at the Democratic party.

Also this:

Remember, Republicans don’t need to win in Massachusetts for a landslide; they could pick up seventy seats without winning a single one in a Democratic-leaning district.

Certainly it’s too early for premature celebration; six months is a long time in politics. But there’s good reason for Republicans to be optimistic…if they don’t blow it.

If Michael Steele isn’t scrambling to make sure every Democratic incumbent has at least one Republican challenger for the general election, he’s not doing his job.