Elections 2009-2012, Part 3

[racehorse]

October 13, 2010

Obama vs. Huckabee?

Here's another good nugget from the New York Times Magazine piece on President Obama:

"Obama advisers expect to incorporate the reelection campaign around March and think the Tea Party ultimately will reelect him by pulling Republican nominee to the right. They doubt Sarah Palin will run, figure Mitt Romney can't get nomination because of his Massachusetts health care program and guess that Obama may end up running against Mike Huckabee."

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/ ... kabee.html

[racehorse]

Snip:

Steve Lombardo
President and CEO, Lombardo Consulting Group

Posted: October 12, 2010 04:50 PM

21 Days to Go and Democrats Facing a 60 - 70 Seat Loss

. . .

Election Projections

We are in agreement with several recent analyses suggesting that there are approximately 35-40 house seats that should be rated in the "toss-up" category. To simplify things we will refer to the RCP assessment that has 39 "toss-up" seats. They have identified 185 seats as either likely or lean Democrat and 211 as either likely or lean GOP. In each of the remaining 39 "toss-up" races the Republicans and Democrats have been polling within points of each other--many are within the margin of error. So let's assume that these 39 races split 50/50, giving the GOP a 20-set pick up. That gives the GOP a 53-seat pick up and control of the House. But a more realistic analysis suggests that in this current environment--keeping in mind the above voting metrics and the GOP turnout advantage--the GOP will win approximately 70% of the toss-up seats. That would mean a total pickup of 60 seats. And then let's also assume that Republicans pick up a few of the "lean Democrat" seats. Our sense is that in a true "wave" election the party with the lead, the enthusiasm and the turnout advantage will take 70-80% of the toss-up seats in addition to some of the seats that "lean" toward the other party. Using this formula, at this point in time it is our sense that the GOP will pick up a total of around 65 seats, giving the GOP control of the House (with 242 seats to the Democrats' 185).

The Senate is easier to visualize but, in some respects, more problematic to project. We continue to believe that it will come down to the West Coast, with the races in California (Boxer and Fiorina) and Washington (Murray and Rossi) holding the key to a Republican takeover. We've put Connecticut in the Democrat column and have put the following in the GOP column: KY, MO, NH, PA and WI. The other four true toss-up states are West Virginia, Colorado, Nevada and Illinois, although there are signs that all four are trending GOP at this time. Assuming Republicans win all four of these toss-up states, that leaves the aforementioned two West Coast races. The GOP would have to win one of those "away games" to get to 51 seats in the Senate. . . .

Complete Article at:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-lom ... 60085.html

[racehorse]

While neither Rand Paul or Jack Conway deserve to represent the Commonwealth of Kentucky in the United States Senate; Conway is acting despicably now (which should surprise no one). He is desperate and I believe his blatant appeal to religious prejudice will backfire on him. It should. Dr. Paul was justifiably offended.

Snip:

October 17, 2010

Rand Paul, Jack Conway toss angry barbs at Louisville debate

More personal attacks mark their latest debate

By Chris Kenning

U.S. Senate candidates Rand Paul and Jack Conway both came out swinging on Sunday night in their most contentious and personally bitter debate, with Paul saying Conway had “descended into the gutter” with campaign ads about his past.

Paul, the Republican candidate and a Bowling Green ophthalmologist and tea party favorite, hammered Conway, a Democrat and Kentucky's attorney general, for ads focusing on allegations Paul joined a group at Baylor University that mocked Christians and once tied up a woman and asked her to worship an idol.

“Jack, you should be ashamed of yourself,” said Paul, who described himself as a “pro-life Christian” and refused to shake Conway's hand after the debate. “Have you no decency? Have you no shame?”

During the debate at the University of Louisville, Conway defended his attacks, which stemmed from published allegations about Paul's time at Baylor, and refused to apologize.

“Why did he freely join a group known for mocking, for making fun of people with faith?” Conway asked. “And … when is it ever a good idea to tie up a woman and ask her to kneel before a false idol, your god, which you call Aqua Buddha?”

With Paul leading in polls, Sunday's debate was the fourth of five scheduled in the nationally watched race before the Nov. 2 election.

Paul and Conway are vying for the job of retiring Republican Sen. Jim Bunning.

The candidates debated before a crowd of more than 300 in Bigelow Hall, fielding questions from students, community members and a media panel that included a Courier-Journal reporter and TV reporters from Louisville, Lexington and Bowling Green.

The debate was moderated by Mark Hebert, U of L's director of media relations.

The debate covered a wide range of issues, including education, immigration and jobs. But the most contentious came during opening statements.

“You know how we can tell when you're lying? When your lips are moving,” Paul said. “You're going to accuse me of a crime from 30 years ago? Run a race as a man … instead of just calling me names.”

Recent campaign ads attacking Paul are based on allegations from an anonymous woman who claimed Paul was the member of a secret society when he attended Baylor University.

Paul has dismissed the reports as “ridiculous.”

A narrator in the ad repeats the claims from the woman, asking why Paul, while in college, tied her up and told her to worship an idol called “Aqua Buddha.”

Paul campaign officials said he was so upset about the ad he considered not coming to the debate.

“How do you argue with someone … who makes stuff up?” Paul said in an exchange that elicited boos and shouts from the audience. . . .

With Kentucky still battling high unemployment, Paul said lower taxes and regulations are needed to make the nation more competitive. Conway said he has a plan that could bring roughly 11,000 new jobs to the state, partly through tax credits.

An opponent of health care reform, Paul criticized Conway for not joining some other states in filing a lawsuit challenging the federal government's ability to require people to carry health insurance, which Paul argued was unconstitutional.

And he said Conway should give back money he earned as attorney general because problems such as prescription drug abuse and meth were getting worse in Kentucky.

Conway shot back, “As the attorney general … I'm always amused to get a lecture on the law from a self-certified ophthalmologist.”

Conway noted he'd started the state's first task force on prescription drug abuse and criticized Paul for his opposition to federal drug programs, such as Operation Unite, a drug task force in Eastern Kentucky.

During closing statements, Paul said he hoped the tone of the campaign would become more positive.

“When this debate ends, you'll notice I will not be shaking his hand tonight. I will not be associated with someone who attacks my religion,” he said, walking past Conway, who extended his hand anyway.

Complete Article at:


http://www.courier-journal.com/print/ar ... lle-debate

[OMG]

I don't think this was meant to be religious prejudice but more saying that Rand joined an odd group at Baylor. Now the normal respond to that would be "Who cares what dumb group I joined back then" instead Rand acts all outraged and now going down the road of "my faith is better than yours" This could have been a quick non-story, by saying "Yeah it was a dumb Baylor club stunt". For me the Aqua Buddha is no big deal, but Rand acting all outrage over something that was known to happen in that Baylor group he joined.

As for anti-religion or religion, or whatever, can we take any references from faith and religion in our govt. I've never asked my doctor or baker or anything how much faith or religion they have, I don't care. Very annoying aspect of elections, along with the mandatory family portrait lol.

[racehorse]

October 22, 2010

Tancredo Nearly Catches Hickenlooper

A new Magellan Strategies survey ( http://www.magellanstrategies.com/web/w ... 022101.pdf ) in Colorado shows John Hickenlooper (D) barely ahead Tom Tancredo (C) in the race for governor, 44% to 43%, with Dan Maes (R) way back at just 9%.

Since a similar August survey, Maes has plummeted from 27% to 9% with the vast majority of his supporters now backing Tancredo.

Early indications from a Public Policy Polling survey currently in the field also suggest the race is competitive.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/ ... ooper.html

[racehorse]

October 24, 2010

Corruption Scandal Rocks Albany

A 300-page report issued by New York Inspector General Joseph Fisch "reveals an almost breathtaking array of abuses by top Democratic officials controlling the legislative and executive branches," reports the Buffalo News.

"Those include: leaking of confidential bidding information to a favored company, potential bid-rigging, pay-to-play campaign donations, arm twisting by dozens of lobbyists and an indifference to facts that all resulted in a 'political free-for-all' across the highest reaches of state government."

New York Times: "The report painted a picture of a state led by Senate Democrats with little apparent interest in serving the public honestly and forthrightly, a Democratic Assembly speaker engaging in political gamesmanship and a Democratic governor disengaged to the point that his own staff withheld crucial information from him and called him a liar in internal e-mails."

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/ ... lbany.html

[racehorse]

Snip:

Poll: Independents siding with GOP

By JAMES HOHMANN & JIM VANDEHEI | 10/24/10 11:27 PM EDT Updated: 10/25/10 6:22 AM EDT

Republicans are on the verge of broad wins next week for one big reason: independent voters are ready to boot Democrats from office, according to a new POLITICO/George Washington University Battleground Poll.

Expressing deep dissatisfaction with President Obama’s policies and performance, independents have increasingly sided with conservatives in the belief that government grew too large, too fast under Obama—and that it can no longer be trusted. In the final pre-election Battleground Poll, Republicans hold a 14-point edge among independents and lead overall, 47 percent to 42 percent, in the generic ballot match up.

The swing among independents rivals the emergence of the spirited Tea Party movement as one of the most important changes in American politics over the past 20 months. Many other polls have confirmed this trend over that period, even though it has been vastly overshadowed by coverage of more provocative characters and themes on the right.

The poll found these independents are merging with Republican voters, who remain decidedly more enthusiastic about voting next Tuesday, to threaten both the House and Senate Democratic governing majorities. The Republican lead expands to 12 points in the generic ballot among those “extremely likely” to vote. . . .

Other notable results from the national poll include:

• Key constituencies and regions that helped Democrats come into power continue turning against them. Whites favor the Republicans 56-33. Suburban voters tilt Republican 51-39, up from 44 percent in early September. Republicans lead 50-41 in the Northeast and 48-42 in the Midwest. Republicans now have a 15-point edge among non-college educated men.

• There are signs of an enthusiasm gap among some traditionally Democratic constituencies. Only 52 percent of all 18-29 year olds and 62 percent of unmarried women say they’re extremely likely to vote. A high percentage of African-American voters support Democratic candidates, but they are much less likely to be very interested in the election. Forty-seven percent of them say they’re “extremely likely” to vote, compared to 73 percent of white voters.

• Republicans have succeeded at making this a referendum on the party in power: 54 percent say they’re casting a ballot either against or for Barack Obama and congressional Democrats. If the 2012 election was held today, he’d lose 48-42 against an unnamed Republican candidate. . . .

Complete Article at:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/44092.html

[racehorse]

Snip:

2012: How Sarah Barracuda Becomes President

Why do you think Barack Obama is being so nice to Michael Bloomberg?


* By John Heilemann

* Published Oct 24, 2010

On a pale-gold mid-October afternoon, Sarah Palin takes the stage at the San Jose Center for the Performing Arts, and the faithful are ready for her. The crowd, 1,500 strong, is mostly white, on the older side, and casually dressed—though in my row there’s a hulking young Samoan in full Revolutionary War regalia. For the past hour, the audience has been treated to a series of warm-up acts that aren’t your typical Northern California fare: a choir called Celestial City; the head of the outfit sponsoring the event, the Liberty & Freedom Foundation, who speaks of a conservative “reawakening”; and a local talk-radio host whose shtick is that of a bargain-basement Glenn Beck, replete with attacks on Karl Marx, Richard Nixon (for creating the EPA), Nancy Pelosi, and, of course, “Barack Hussein Obama.”

Palin’s own brand of performance art is no less barbed and no more subtle, but still infinitely fascinating. In a deep-blue jacket and tight black skirt, she uncorks a 40-minute soliloquy that is equal parts populism, moralism, stand-up comedy, and free association, all rendered in a syntax as fractured as Joe Theismann’s tibia after Lawrence Taylor got through with him. She doles out personal, if possibly fictitious, anecdotes that position her, despite the millions she has pocketed in the past two years, as a defiantly downscale girl: that she and Todd drove their motor home from Wasilla to Los Angeles (distance: 3,375 miles) to watch Bristol on Dancing With the Stars. She winks (metaphorically) at her pop-culture image, snapping off a “you betcha” and later declaring, “November 2 is right around the corner—I can see it from my house!” She rails against union bosses who are “thugs” and “elitist billionaires who are funding the leftist agenda,” while gaily mocking Obama, Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, and Jerry Brown: “They act like they’re permanent residents of some unicorn ranch in fantasyland.” She invokes the California of old as a paradise lost and declares that it must be regained: “I want you all to get to yell ‘Eureka’ in this Golden State of opportunity.” And she cites Ronald Reagan in promising the same for the country: “If we do our part, as President Reagan said … the great confident roar of American progress, growth, and optimism will resound again!”

This is a stump speech—or, at least, it sounds that way to many in the crowd. With each stanza, their cheers for Palin escalate from loud to deafening, and by the end, more than a few are shouting out, “Run, Sarah!” and “Madam President!”

Until not long ago, the only people who took seriously the notion that Palin would make a White House bid in 2012, let alone win the Republican nomination, were those who really do live at the unicorn ranch—and spend their time there huffing pixie dust. When Palin quit the Alaska governorship in 2009, her political career seemed over. And even after she resurrected herself, emerging through her media ubiquity and her aggressive endorsement strategy as arguably the most powerful figure in the GOP, much of the political world believed that she was animated by non-presidential motives. To further pad her bank account. To redeem her reputation. To turn herself into the party’s preeminent kingmaker. Or possibly all three.

But today the conventional wisdom about Palin is being revised again, nowhere more so than within the ranks of professional Republicans. Among two dozen senior strategists and operatives with whom I’ve spoken in recent days—including many of those responsible for securing the nomination for the party’s last three standard-bearers—there is a growing consensus that Palin is running or setting herself up to run. All agreed that her entry would radically and fundamentally transform the race. Most averred that if she steps into the fray, she stands a reasonable chance of claiming the Republican prize. Indeed, more than one argued that she is already the de facto front-runner.

For many Republicans, a Palin nomination would be a shrieking nightmare—just as for most Democrats, it would be a wet dream. (Asked about the possibility by reporters, David Plouffe, Obama’s 2008 campaign manager, quipped, “Something tells me we won’t get that lucky.”) The emotions here are diametrically opposed but based on a shared conviction: that Palin, whose national approval rating in a CBS News poll this month stood at a lowly 22 percent, is irredeemably unelectable, and thus her nomination would essentially guarantee Obama a second term.

Or would it? In a two-way contest, almost certainly. But what if a Palin nomination provoked a credible independent candidacy? What if the candidacy in question was that of, oh, Michael Rubens Bloomberg? What would happen then?

That’s a lot of ifs, I hear you saying, and you are not wrong. Yet none of these twists is actually all that implausible. In fact, the likelihood of Bloomberg’s running is just as great as, if not greater than, it was when he considered taking the plunge in 2008—and that specter is very much on the minds of Obama’s people. In the past few months, the White House has made a gaudy show of sucking up to the mayor: inviting him to play golf in Martha’s Vineyard with Obama, floating his name as a potential Treasury secretary, dispatching Joe Biden and Tim Geithner to have breakfast with him and seek his economic counsel. The motivations behind the blandishments are many, but not the least is to blunt the Bloomberg threat—to keep him on the sidelines in 2012, where he and his billions would pose no danger of redrawing the electoral map in unpredictable and perilous ways. . . .

Rest of Article at:

http://nymag.com/news/politics/69130/

-

[racehorse]

Snip:

GOP poised to win redistricting supremacy, too


By JENNIFER C. KERR

The Associated Press
updated 44 minutes ago 2010-10-25T18:56:50

WASHINGTON — The Republicans' expected gains next week go way beyond Congress. The GOP could capture new Senate or House majorities in a dozen to 18 states — along with critical new power to redraw district maps and influence elections for a decade to come.

Three of the biggest prizes are New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania. All three states are expected to lose seats in Congress as a result of the 2010 census, and that's sure to ignite boundary fights. A party's congressman on the wrong end of redistricting can find the district he's represented for years no longer exists.

Democrats have hopes, too. They aim to take away state Senate control in Michigan and Kentucky and the House in Texas and Tennessee. Texas would be a particular victory, since it seems likely to have four more seats to divvy up under the new census. But none of the analysts contacted by The Associated Press predicted the Democrats would succeed in any of those states.

Both houses in Florida, a state that's expected to gain two seats in Congress, are likely to remain under GOP control.

While most of the attention in next week's midterm elections is focused on races for Congress and governor, results in scores of local, down-ticket races carry far-reaching implications, likely to dilute Democrats' dominance in the once-every-10-years redrawing of political district boundaries for the U.S. House.

In most states, redistricting falls to the Legislature, which will draw new boundaries based on the 2010 census. The party in control has a huge advantage and can draw district lines that could determine whether Republicans or Democrats dominate a state's congressional delegation for an entire decade, and possibly even control of the U.S. House itself.

"There's a big historic trend that points to this being a Republican election," said Tim Storey, an elections expert at the National Conference of State Legislatures. "It's tough for the party in the White House to win in midterm elections at the state legislative level, and Democrats are really at a peak of seats right now."


If Republicans pull off a landslide next week, Storey sees the GOP taking majorities away from Democrats in as many as 18 legislative chambers. . . .

Rest of Article at:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39835705/ns/politics/

[racehorse]

Obama Can 'Shove It': RI Dem Gov Candidate


09:40 am

October 25, 2010

by Frank James


President Obama has decided to go with loyalty over party in the Rhode Island governor's race, a decision that has upset the Democratic candidate for governor in that state who learned he won't be getting Obama's endorsement during a presidential visit to the state Monday.

Frank Caprio, the Democratic candidate for governor of the small New England state, expressed his unhappiness Monday morning during a radio interview on WPRO-AM.

The Providence Journal reported that during his Rhode Island visit, the president wouldn't be endorsing Caprio who is in a three-way race that includes former Sen. Lincoln Chafee who is running as an independent.

The former lawmaker is a Republican moderate who endorsed Obama during the 2008 presidential campaign. Thus, Obama is returning the favor by not endorsing the Democrat.

WPRO reports on Caprio's comments:

"He can take his endorsement and really shove it", Caprio told John Depetro and the WPRO morning news. Caprio told WPRO he did not seek the President's endorsement and calls the snub Washington politics.

"We had one of the worst floods in the history of the United States a few months back and President Obama didn't even do a fly over of Rhode Island. He ignored us and now he's coming into Rhode Island and treating us like an ATM machine", said Caprio.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics ... -candidate

---

Fallout

DGA: Obama 'sends a bad message'

By JONATHAN ALLEN | 10/25/10 12:50 PM Updated: 10/25/10 2:16 PM

Nathan Daschle, the executive director of the Democratic Governors Association, tells POLITICO that President Obama's decision not to endorse Frank Caprio in Rhode Island "sends a bad message."

"This is disappointing,” Daschle said. “Frank Caprio has spent his career fighting for the values of the Democratic Party, and I think he deserves the full support of our party and its leaders. While this might not be what the White House intended, the president’s refusal to endorse a fellow Democrat in the worst environment since 1994 sends a bad message to everyone who’s working to get Democrats elected this year."

http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm ... f3b74.html

--

Frank Caprio, Rhode Island Democratic candidate for governor.

[racehorse]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/127439/Elect ... ators.aspx

[SETIsLady]

Obama Can 'Shove It': RI Dem Gov Candidate

How professional of him.

[Psychicwolf]

Race, what will you do if Sarah is the GOP candidate in 2012?:D

[racehorse]

Race, what will you do if Sarah is the GOP candidate in 2012?:D

Psychicwolf, I am going to help prevent that from happening.

I will not support Sarah Palin for President under any circumstances but if she were the GOP nominee, there would be another viable option other than either of the two major party nominees.

[Psychicwolf]

Psychicwolf, I am going to help prevent that from happening.

I will not support Sarah Palin for President under any circumstances but if she were the GOP nominee, there would be another viable option other than either of the two major party nominees.

I think I'm voting Green next time. LOL