Elections 2009-2012

Moderator: Super Moderators

SETIsLady
Pirate
Posts: 19872
Joined: 04-14-2003 08:52 PM

DCCC Chair 'Very Confident' There Will Be No More Defections

Post by SETIsLady » 12-27-2009 12:02 PM

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said on Sunday he was "very confident" that there would be no more defections by House Democrats to the Republican Party between now and the 2010 elections.

The Maryland Democrat, in an appearance on "Fox News Sunday," was referring to the announcement this past week that Alabama Rep. Parker Griffith was joining the GOP. Van Hollen laced into his former colleague, calling Griffith an opportunist who was going to have trouble surviving inside the Republican tent. He even brought, to the set, a copy of Griffith's local paper, the Huntsville Times, which accused the lawmaker of operating out of "self-preservation, not conviction."

"He got coal in his stocking" for Christmas, Van Hollen said. "The fact is, [Griffith] did a poll showing he might be in trouble. My view is he miscalculated politically."

The DCCC chair also sought to allay concerns that the Democratic Party was slated to sustain huge losses come 2010. Saying he wouldn't be happy if the Democrats were to lose 20 seats (the average loss sustained by the party in power during the midterm election of a president's first term) Van Hollen stressed that the political landscape was vastly different now then in midterms past.

"Let's put these numbers in perspective," he said. "You said there are 11 Democratic retirements [this year]. There are 12 Republicans who are not running for their seats, including people like Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.) and Mark Kirk (R-Ill) in very competitive seats for Democrats. Number two, we're not going to be surprised like in 1994, and we've been preparing from day one. And number three, Republicans... the public [view] of the Republican Party right now [is] very, very low. And that contrasts with 1994. So is this going to be a tough year? Yeah. We're ready to fight."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/2 ... 04254.html

User avatar
racehorse
Pirate
Posts: 14976
Joined: 01-04-2003 03:00 AM
Location: Commonwealth of Kentucky

Re: DCCC Chair 'Very Confident' There Will Be No More Defect

Post by racehorse » 12-27-2009 12:14 PM

Originally from the Article posted by SETIsLady
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said on Sunday he was "very confident" that there would be no more defections by House Democrats to the Republican Party between now and the 2010 elections.


Hi SETIsLady :)

We will see. ;)
racehorse
Image

SETIsLady
Pirate
Posts: 19872
Joined: 04-14-2003 08:52 PM

Re: Re: DCCC Chair 'Very Confident' There Will Be No More De

Post by SETIsLady » 12-27-2009 12:34 PM

racehorse wrote: Hi SETIsLady :)

We will see. ;)
Both parties may be in for a surprise you never know :p

User avatar
racehorse
Pirate
Posts: 14976
Joined: 01-04-2003 03:00 AM
Location: Commonwealth of Kentucky

Post by racehorse » 12-28-2009 11:44 AM

http://www.kentucky.com/517/v-print/story/1073956.html

Monday, Dec 28, 2009

With McCarthy at helm, GOP hopes for big gains in 2010

By ROB HOTAKAINEN
McClatchy Newspapers

With visions of a Republican majority dancing in his head, Rep. Kevin McCarthy of California is driving the back roads of America these days, looking for fresh faces to represent his party in 2010.

"I believe this will be a wave election," McCarthy said. "This will be a national election."

To regain control of the House of Representatives, Republicans must pick up 41 seats. If they win big in the House next year, it will be at least partly because the party put McCarthy in charge of its recruiting efforts.

It's the latest high-profile assignment for McCarthy, who serves as his party's chief deputy whip. Earlier this month, he was chosen in a poll of congressional insiders as the Republican member of Congress with the "brightest political future."

After watching his party get slaughtered in the last two elections, McCarthy is feeling optimistic about its chances of a comeback in 2010. Voters increasingly are becoming disenfranchised with the Democratic majority in Washington, he said.

Taking control "would be a very big climb," McCarthy said. However, he said, Republican chances are increasing as Democrats promote policies such as their brand of health care restructuring, going "directly against what the American people say they want."

"They're still shoving it down people's throats," said McCarthy, whose 22nd Congressional District stretches from the San Joaquin Valley to the coast, covering most of Kern and San Luis Obispo counties and northeastern Los Angeles County.

McCarthy isn't alone in predicting Republican gains, which would be expected after the election of a Democratic president.

The Cook Political Report, an independent, nonpartisan newsletter, estimates that 77 Democratic House seats could be competitive next year, compared with 26 Republican seats. Most analysts say it's not a question of whether the Republican Party will pick up seats, but of how many.

Democrats are bracing for a tough year.

"We've been saying from day one this was going to be a challenging year," said Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. "... We told our members to fasten their seat belts and get ready from the start, and we continue to say that."

McCarthy's colleagues are happy that he's leading their recruiting effort.

Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Calif., who served with McCarthy in the California Legislature, said McCarthy was "exactly the right person" for the job.

"He's a very capable individual," McClintock said. "And don't forget he was the Republican leader in the State Assembly and did a magnificent job, by all accounts."

Democrats, however, note that McCarthy's recruiting hasn't been without problems. In Oregon, he recruited a mayor who later was fined for unlawfully converting his campaign money to personal use.

McCarthy said he had recruited 68 "top-tier" challengers and expected to reach 120. He said money was flowing to the party's candidates already, and that 51 Republican challengers already had more than $100,000 each in cash on hand.

McCarthy said he had no interest in recruiting state lawmakers for Congress. He said he was looking for political novices, new faces, idea generators and solution-oriented people who had had success in their personal lives.

In August, McCarthy took a road trip to Illinois, Iowa, Wisconsin, North Carolina and Tennessee. He said he also had trips planned to Louisiana, Mississippi and New York.

McCarthy said he found the embodiment of the candidate he was searching for when he met Stephen Fincher, a gospel-singing cotton farmer from Tennessee.

"They say this farmer's going to come and see me," McCarthy said. "And in Tennessee, they talk a little different than in California. I said, 'Steve, where do you live?' He said, 'I live in Frog Jump, Tennessee.' I said, 'What do you farm?' He said, 'I farm cotton.' ... I just look at this guy and said this is what America is about. He is true to his convictions, to his philosophy, and he's not going to change coming to Washington. ... This guy is my favorite."

When he goes on his recruiting trips, McCarthy said, he leaves his suits and ties behind, wearing Levi's most of the time.

"Someone will talk to you longer in Levi's, and I'm there to listen," he said. "I'm there to understand what the district is looking for and answer questions."

He suggested that people don't need to fear the guy from Washington when McCarthy comes to their town.

"I am so anti-Washington," he said. "I've only been here three years. I don't live here. I ran against this place. And I'm fighting against this place."

McCarthy is watching the political indicators closely. Two big ones came in November, he said, when voters elected Republican governors in New Jersey and Virginia, two states that backed President Barack Obama in 2008.

McCarthy said Republicans had won the governorships in those states in 1993, a year before they won control of the House, and that Democrats won them in 2005, a year before they returned to power. He's also excited about a party poll taken in the two states this year: When voters were asked whether they were sending a message to Obama about his agenda, 72 percent said yes.

McCarthy said any Democrat who had served five terms or more would be particularly vulnerable in 2010. Usually, he said, it's best to challenge freshmen and sophomore legislators who haven't had enough time to build up their name recognition. He predicted, however, that angry voters will take out their frustration on long-term incumbents in 2010.

"They don't see any solutions coming out of Washington," McCarthy said. "In a wave election and in a national election, where you're sending a message, it doesn't matter if you've been there. If you've been there, you're part of the problem."
--
Rep. Kevin McCarthy was chosen in a poll of congressional insiders as the GOP member of Congress with the "brightest political future."
racehorse
Image

User avatar
racehorse
Pirate
Posts: 14976
Joined: 01-04-2003 03:00 AM
Location: Commonwealth of Kentucky

Post by racehorse » 12-28-2009 12:00 PM

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/polit ... 73947.html

Texas shows its swagger in new population estimates

By: Michael Barone
Senior Political Analyst

December 27, 2009

Every year roundabout Christmastime the Census Bureau releases its population estimates for each state for the 12 months ending on July 1. The numbers look dry on a sheet of paper (or on an Excel spreadsheet on your computer), but they tell some vivid stories. The more so when they reflect, as the numbers for 2008-09 do, the effects of a sharp downward shift in the nation's economy.

Given the recession, it's not a surprise that percentage growth, at 0.86 percent, was the lowest in this decade, just a tad below the rate in 2002-03 and well below the peak years of 2000-01 (which doesn't include Sept. 11) and 2006-07. Immigration is down sharply, and some indicators suggest that illegal immigrants, in particular, are returning to their countries of origin.

Also, internal mobility is down. In times of economic troubles, people tend to stay put. When we think of the 1930s, we tend to think of the Okies leaving the Dust Bowl for the green land of California. But the Okies were the exception. The vast bulk of Americans in the Depression decade stayed home and tended their gardens.

One thing that stands out from the 2008-09 numbers is that Americans are no longer flocking to the resorts of the Sun Belt. Florida's growth was well below the national average, as it was in the previous year, in contrast to its torrid growth over most of the last century.

California grew at only a little more than the national average, entirely because of immigrant inflow and high immigrant birth rates. More Americans are leaving California and Florida than moving in.

The same is true of Nevada and Arizona. For most of the last two decades, they have been our two fastest-growing states; Las Vegas and Phoenix have become major metropolises in the desert.

But now they're metropolises in trouble, with the nation's highest foreclosure rates and collapsed construction and real estate industries. Nevada was only the 16th-fastest-growing state in 2008-09, and that's only because of (decreased) immigrant inflow. Arizona, the fastest-growing state in the previous year, now ranks No. 7.

Immigration into Nevada, Arizona and California continues, though at lower rates than earlier in the decade. Interestingly, several Northeastern states -- New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, Maryland, Connecticut, Rhode Island -- continue to attract large percentages of immigrants, but even they (except for Massachusetts) suffer from domestic outflow. Public policies -- high taxes and welfare benefits -- may account for these seemingly contradictory trends.

In contrast, this recession has seen several states move from below-average to above-average population growth. They include Oklahoma, with its energy-based economy; Tennessee, one of the few states without an income tax; and South Dakota, with its thriving credit card economy.

The state with the fastest population growth in 2008-09 was demographically tiny Wyoming, the nation's largest coal producer, which has had a higher rate of domestic in-migration than any other state. Just behind, at No. 2, was Utah. With the nation's largest birth rates and largest families, Utah demographically resembles the America of the 1950s.

No. 3 in percentage population growth in 2008-09 was giant Texas, the nation's second-most-populous state. Its population grew by almost half a million and accounted for 18 percent of the nation's total population growth. Texas had above-average immigrant growth, but domestic in-migration was nearly twice as high.

There may be lessons for public policy here. Texas over the decades has had low taxes (and no state income tax), low public spending and regulations that encourage job growth. It didn't have much of a housing bubble or a housing price bust.

Under Govs. George W. Bush and Rick Perry, it has placed tight limits on tort lawsuits and has seen an influx of both corporate headquarters and medical doctors.

Bush's late job ratings may have been low, and Perry may be a wine that doesn't travel. But their approach to governing may not be lost even in Washington.

Polidata Inc. projects from the 2009 estimates that the reapportionment following the 2010 Census will produce four new House seats for Texas, one for Florida, Arizona, Utah and Nevada, and none for California for the first time since 1850. Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Illinois are projected to lose one each and Ohio two. Americans have been moving, even in recession, away from Democratic strongholds and toward Republican turf.

.
racehorse
Image

User avatar
racehorse
Pirate
Posts: 14976
Joined: 01-04-2003 03:00 AM
Location: Commonwealth of Kentucky

Post by racehorse » 12-28-2009 06:19 PM

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2009/ ... match.html

December 28, 2009

Webb-Allen Rematch?

The Washington Post ( http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virgin ... match.html ) reports that former Sen. George Allen (R-VA) opened the door to a possible rematch against Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) in 2012.

A Public Policy Polling survey ( http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/ ... plines.pdf ) conducted in August -- but released today for the first time -- finds Allen edging Webb, 44% to 43%.

Analysis: "The 'Macaca' incident certainly played a part in Allen's 2006 loss, but its being a terrible year for Republicans nationally may have played a bigger role. He would have survived in most other election cycles, and his present numbers are an indication that he's far from unelectable in the future."
racehorse
Image

User avatar
racehorse
Pirate
Posts: 14976
Joined: 01-04-2003 03:00 AM
Location: Commonwealth of Kentucky

Post by racehorse » 12-29-2009 12:09 PM

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 21904.html

DECEMBER 28, 2009, 10:31 P.M. ET

The Tyranny of the Majority Party

If Democrats insist on passing unpopular laws, they won't control Congress for long.


By FRED BARNES

Alexis de Tocqueville never met Harry Reid. Had he encountered the Senate Democratic leader—or President Barack Obama or House Speaker Nancy Pelosi—de Tocqueville might have learned about a new twist on his concept of the "tyranny of the majority."

The Frenchman toured America in the 1830s and published his conclusions in the classic "Democracy in America." He noted the powerful impact of public opinion. "That is what forms the majority," he wrote. Congress merely "represents the majority and obeys it blindly" and so does the president. They are free to brush aside minority opinion, creating a threat de Tocqueville described as the "tyranny of the majority."

Democrats in Washington do have large majorities in Congress. But instead of reflecting popular opinion, they are pursuing wide-ranging initiatives in defiance of the views of the majority of Americans. This stands de Tocqueville's concept on its head.

The most striking example is health-care reform. It is intensely unpopular but was approved by the House in November and the Senate on Christmas Eve. Asked in a Rasmussen poll in mid-December if they'd prefer no bill to ObamaCare, 57% said they would. Only 34% said they'd rather ObamaCare be enacted.

Yet Democrats are forging ahead as if the public actually approves of their health-care reform. Why, when Republicans are preparing to hammer them on the issue in next year's elections, would they do that?

Democrats offer different explanations—besides their obsessive attachment to national health care—which suggests that they aren't quite sure of the political fallout.

After Senate Democrats locked up the 60th vote to assure Senate passage of ObamaCare, Mr. Obama sounded worry-free. Risk? What risk? The bill "is a major step forward for the American people," he said. The president didn't mention the public's disapproval as expressed in countless polls. Vice President Joe Biden, in an op-ed in the New York Times, didn't either.

David Axelrod, a senior adviser to the president, is more realistic. While acknowledging bad poll numbers, he suggested recently on ABC's "This Week" that enactment of sweeping health-care legislation will melt public misgivings. "The reality, I think, will trump poll numbers in the dead of winter as this debate is going on," Mr. Axelrod said.

Ms. Pelosi, too, is brimming with wishful thinking. "Now we will have the attention placed on the truly great things that are in the bill that we have in common," she declared recently. And Sen. Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) told Politico, "When people see what is in this bill and when people see what it does, they will come around."

Then there are the martyrs. Doing a reverse de Tocqueville, willingly endangering one's political career by voting for ObamaCare, hasn't fazed Democrat Michael Bennet, the appointed senator from Colorado. He was asked by CNN's John King whether he'd vote for ObamaCare "if every piece of evidence tells you, if you support that bill, you'll lose your job." Mr. Bennet said "yes."

Mr. Bennet isn't the only potential martyr. A Democratic strategist told Byron York of the Washington Examiner that Mrs. Pelosi "believes losing 20 or even 40 Democratic seats in the House would be an acceptable price for achieving a goal the party has pursued since Franklin Roosevelt." Now that Alabama Rep. Parker Griffith has bolted the Democratic Party, Republicans need 40 seats to capture control of the House.

With large congressional majorities, Democrats decided to forget about Mr. Obama's campaign theme of bipartisanship. They brook no compromise with Republicans and forge ahead on issue after issue—health care, cap and trade, Guantanamo, spending, the deficit—despite the public's mounting disapproval.

That arrogance shaped the economic stimulus passed in February. Republicans wanted tax cuts to spur investment and create jobs. Democrats rejected that idea and enacted a huge increase in spending. As unemployment continued to rise, public opinion turned against the stimulus. Nonetheless, House Democrats passed a new, smaller stimulus bill last week with the same emphasis on spending.

Large majorities create what de Tocqueville called a sense of "omnipotence." This leads to overreaching and spawns dubious ideas. Since Democrats believe they will benefit from passing any sort of health-care bill regardless of public opinion, they're committed to passing anything they can call a "historic" achievement. That makes little sense.

With history in mind, cutting procedural corners becomes acceptable. Thus Democrats have set arbitrary deadlines, scheduled post-midnight votes and put limits on debate, all in the name of achieving a breakthrough.

Not that such behavior is anomalous. To pass a Medicare prescription drug benefit in 2003, Republicans kept the House vote open for three hours to round up votes. Unlike ObamaCare, however, the drug benefit had popular support.

This is not the first time in recent memory when a sizeable congressional majority, feeling self-sufficient, ignored popular opinion at its peril. In 1995, Republicans, led by newly installed House Speaker Newt Gingrich, shut down the federal government in their fight over spending with President Bill Clinton. The public sided with Mr. Clinton, and the clash spurred his re-election in 1996.

William Daley, who was Mr. Clinton's Commerce secretary and is the brother of Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, worries that Democrats are doing now what Republicans did then: provoking a public backlash. Democrats must "acknowledge that the agenda of the party's most liberal supporters has not won the support of a majority of Americans," he wrote last week in the Washington Post. "Either we plot a more moderate, centrist course or risk electoral disaster not just in the upcoming midterms but in many elections to come."

"I regard as impious and detestable the maxim that in matters of government the majority of a people has the right to do everything," de Tocqueville wrote roughly 175 years ago. But what about a congressional majority—which lacks a mandate from a majority of Americans—seeking to do everything? The Frenchman might have dubbed that the "tyranny of the minority.
racehorse
Image

User avatar
racehorse
Pirate
Posts: 14976
Joined: 01-04-2003 03:00 AM
Location: Commonwealth of Kentucky

Post by racehorse » 12-29-2009 01:06 PM

http://realclearpolitics.blogs.time.com ... e-in-2012/

December 29th, 2009

Poll Shows Nelson Vulnerable In 2012

Jumping ahead one election cycle, Rasmussen has a new survey out (500 LVs, 12/28, MoE +/- 4.5%) looking at Sen. Ben Nelson's (D) potential vulnerability should he seek a third term in 2012. Few have had a higher-profile role in the health care debate, with Nelson proving to be the last holdout for Democrats in getting 60 votes to bring bills to the floor and for passage.

Rasmussen matches Nelson up with Gov. Dave Heineman (R), who would be seeking a second full term next fall.

2012 General Election Matchup

Heineman 61

Nelson 30

Und 4


In that hypothetical contest, Nelson may be in trouble regardless of how he votes on health care when the final bill comes back from conference. But when asked who they would favor if Nelson voted against the final health care bill, the gap does narrow to 10 -- 47 to 37 in favor of Heineman.

The poll also found that by a margin of 62-17 percent, Nebraskans opposed a deal Nelson secured that would see the federal government pick up new Medicaid expenses brought about by the legislation.

Nelson has a 40 percent favorable rating, while 55 percent view him unfavorably, including 34 percent who say very unfavorably. Forty-seven percent say he's handled the health care issue poorly, compared to 6 percent who say excellent and 20 percent who say good. Forty-two percent say Nelson has been too supportive of President Obama's agenda. Obama has a 38 percent job approval rating in the survey.
racehorse
Image

Linnea
Moderator
Posts: 14985
Joined: 04-22-2000 02:00 AM

Note to Racehorse

Post by Linnea » 12-29-2009 01:35 PM

We will be starting a new P&G thread for 2010-2013 (with the optimism we will still be here when the Mayan Calendar cycles ;-> ). This thread will be transferred to the new thread as a closed thread after Dec 31st as the posts total over 500 in the thread and an 'Elections 2009-2012 Part 2' thread needs to be started at that time. Actually, you should start a Part 2 thread in the new P&G section now, in advance of the year end deadline. When that is done, this thread will be closed and transferred to the new thread.

Note: The 2010-2013 P&G thread is now open

User avatar
racehorse
Pirate
Posts: 14976
Joined: 01-04-2003 03:00 AM
Location: Commonwealth of Kentucky

Re: Note to Racehorse

Post by racehorse » 12-29-2009 01:50 PM

Linnea wrote: We will be starting a new P&G thread for 2010-2013 (with the optimism we will still be here when the Mayan Calendar cycles ;-> ). This thread will be transferred to the new thread as a closed thread after Dec 31st as the posts total over 500 in the thread and an 'Elections 2009-2012 Part 2' thread needs to be started at that time. Actually, you should start a Part 2 thread in the new P&G section now, in advance of the year end deadline. When that is done, this thread will be closed and transferred to the new thread.

Note: The 2010-2013 P&G thread is now open


Okay.

Thanks, Linnea. :)
racehorse
Image

Linnea
Moderator
Posts: 14985
Joined: 04-22-2000 02:00 AM

Post by Linnea » 12-29-2009 01:57 PM

Thank you for your 'heroic participation' in P&G, Racehorse. Your contributions are much appreciated!

:)

Onward!

Post Reply

Return to “Politics and Government 2010-2013”