|
November 10, 2006
Week-End Links
RWN returns on Monday. Until then, enjoy the links below, consider this an open thread, and have a great week-end!
Ankle Biting Pundits
Captain's Quarters
Ace of Spades HQ
Hog On Ice
Hot Air
Hugh Hewitt
Human Events
Instapundit
Mary Katharine Ham's Blog
Michelle Malkin
Newsbusters
Power Line
Redstate
Real Clear Politics
Wizbang!
PS: RWN needs some tech help -- someone who's skilled with PHP, MySQL, and preferably is familiar with movable type, too. Design skills would also be a plus. Unfortunately, since my funds are limited, I couldn't afford to pay very much for any work you did, but hopefully we could find a way to work something out anyway. If you're interested, shoot me an email or let me know something in the comments section (Also, if possible, could you point me in the direction of some work you've done in the past.)
Q&A Friday #53: Should Conservatives Let Democrats Impeach Bush?
Question: "Given that he's still the President and wields enormous power, how closely should conservatives in this country continue their association with President Bush, especially since he now seems hell bent to make common cause with Mrs. Pelosi against his erstwhile supporters? Wouldn't it ultimately be better for conservatives just to let Mrs. Pelosi and her minions "have" him, purging, even if not completely, the Rockefeller/Bush/Country Club Republicans from the GOP that has only survived by hitching along saprophytically on Goldwater/Reaganite conservatism? Additionally, given his repeated disloyalty toward us his base, our continued support of Mr. Bush, a man who appears increasingly unworthy of our support, seems more and more pathologic, a sort of political co-dependency." -- Cartman
Answer: Three things:
First off, I expect Bush to be ENORMOUSLY disappointing on domestic issues over the last couple of years of his term. After all, he was disappointing on domestic issues before, he's a country club conservative, he doesn't seem to care much about what movement conservatives want, he hasn't shown much inclination to veto anything, and he hasn't ever shown much stomach for going toe to toe with the Democrats. So, my expectation is that Bush is going to make conservatives pull their hair out over the next two years.
Still, it would be a huge mistake for conservatives to stand by and let him be unfairly impeached. He doesn't deserve to be impeached, it would set a horrible precedent, it would cause massive Republican infighting, it would send a dangerous signal to our country's enemies, it would endanger the war on terror, and just on general principle, I refuse to give the Democrats a single inch of ground that they don't earn.
That being said, I don't think Republicans should show the slightest hesitation any more about vocally disagreeing with Bush whenever he goes off the farm. If you look at the biggest problems the GOP had in the last election cycle, Bush was at the center of most of them. He supports amnesty, he's a big government conservative, Harriet Miers, the Dubai Port Deal, refusing to fight back against the Democrats, etc.
Where we are at now as a party is at the same place as we were at in the seventies, when Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan represented two different wings of the party. Ford, like Bush, stood for sort of a weak kneed, moderate, wishy-washy Republican Party while Ronald Reagan said no, the GOP should follow a muscular, conservative agenda.
What needs to happen now for the GOP to succeed is that the movement conservatives have got to triumph over the watered down Bush/McCain/Giuliani vision for the Republican party just like Reagan triumphed over Ford.
Q&A Friday #53: When Will Mike Nifong Drop The Prosecution Against The Duke Lacrosse Players?
Question: Now that Mike Nifong has been re-elected (God, I'm embarrassed sometimes that Durham's my hometown), how long do you estimate he'll wait before (quietly) dropping all charges against those three fellows in the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case? -- Good_Ol_Boy
Answer: These Duke Lacrosse players are obviously innocent and people have been pointing that out for months and ripping Nifong for his pathetic, politically motivated prosecution. Since that's the case and since dropping the case, at any point, would be in effect an admission that his critics were right, I think he'd rather take it to trial and lose than do the right thing at this point. Of course, that does a great disservice to those 3 Lacrosse players who've had their names unfairly dragged through the mud, but if Nifong were an honorable and decent man, he would have given up the ghost on this case long ago.
Q&A Friday #53: Should Emergency Rooms Require ID Before Administering Treatment?
Question: "With unpaid medical bills (at least a quater of which are coming from illegals) driving the cost of treatment ever higher and pushing the US towards socialized medicine (an enormous mistake IMO) my question is: Shouldn't hospital emergency rooms require some form of legal identification before administering services?" -- Good_Ol_Boy
Answer: I'm of the opinion that it would be immoral to deny someone emergency medical services, regardless of their legal status. However, I don't believe hospitals should provide long-term care to illegals.
In other words, break your leg and head to the hospital, then you get treated whether you're legal or illegal. On the other hand, if you'll need regular long-term treatment and you're not here legally, you should either have to pay for it or go home. It's not our job to provide free health care service to the world and I don't think Americans should have to spend more for health care because some illegal with tuberculosis or AIDS snuck into the United States and can't pay for his treatment.
Advertising Promo
How about clicking on just a few of these ads? It helps support Right Wing News and it rewards advertisers for spending money on conservative blogs. So, hope you'll help out!
Link #1
Link #2
Link #3
Link #4
Link #5
Link #6
Link #7
Link #8
Link #9
Happy Veteran's Day Tomorrow
RWN won't be updated tomorrow, so I want to take the opportunity to wish a happy Veteran's Day to our soldiers, past and present. This country has been and remains free, prosperous, and powerful only because we have soldiers who are willing to kill and if necessary, die, for this country. Without the sacrifices our troops have made and continue to make, this country could not succeed.
So, God bless the troops and thank you for everything you've done for America.
Q&A Friday #53: Will We Be Attacked By Aliens?
Question: A former British official says England could be attacked by aliens (not Mexicans.) Are such worries credible?" -- tblrk2006
Answer: Well, we haven't been attacked by aliens yet in recorded human history, so my guess is that we're probably safe for the time being.
However, even if there are aliens out there and they decided to attack us, I'm not sure that there's anything much we could do to prepare for it because we'd have no idea what they'd be like or what their weak spots would be. Moreover, we could certainly count on the fact that if aliens managed to travel all the way here and were intent on doing us harm, they would likely be so technologically superior to us that there wouldn't be much of anything we could do to stop them anyway.
PS: If we're going to be worried about threats from the skies, we'd be better off worrying about asteroids. As we're sitting here right now, there could be an asteroid a couple of days away from us that's big enough to take out LA, cause mega-tsunamis, and cause higgledy-piggledy on a global scale. Yet, chances are that we wouldn't even have the slightest idea that it was bearing down on us until it was too late to even run to a fall-out shelter in the back yard.
Q&A Friday #53: Do The Democrats Pay More Attention To The Blogosphere Than The Republicans?
Question: It would seem that the Left listens to their bloggers closer than the Right does. (See also Ned Lamont.) Do you agree, or is this merely perception? -- Lou Moran
Answer: I do agree that the left pays more attention to its bloggers, although that's changing a bit.
As far as I could tell, the GOP paid almost no attention whatsoever to the blogosphere before the 2004 election. Then, about the time Bush put up Harriet Miers and the blogosphere was just savaging him for that, the GOP started trying to really engage the blogosphere. Since then, we get bazillions of press releases, the occasional teleconference, and last I heard, the RNC had a daily report going around discussing what was going on in the blogosphere.
Still, the left side of the blogosphere has more influence with the Democratic Party, which I would argue is to the Democratic Party's disadvantage.
To tell you the truth, I think it would be a mistake for the GOP to pay as much attention to the right side of the blogosphere as the Democrats pay to the left side, in part, because the right side of the blogosphere is significantly less socially conservative and more libertarian than the base is as a whole.
On the other hand, if the Republicans in Washington started paying more attention to the blogosphere, conservative columnists and mags, and conservative talk radio, I think that would be helpful because as the elections proved, as a group, we're a lot more in tune with what the conservative base thinks than most of the Republicans in Washington.
Destroying The Republican Brand
Imagine if, day in and day out, every week for a month, you heard nothing but lousy stories about Toyotas. One day you hear that they're prone to flip over. The next day it's a mystery explosion. The next day you hear about the dealers using faulty parts. A couple of days later, the wheels pop off another Toyota in traffic and a 50 car pile-up results.
Now, imagine that you're a local Toyota dealer -- and a good one. You sell cars at a good price, you make sure they're kept in perfect condition, you really care about serving your customers. Well, guess what? Your business is going to suffer terribly, even though you might be doing a great job.
Well, in essence, that's what happened on Tuesday. The GOP brand is like the Toyota brand in the example above. It has been so run down and sullied with the general public that it just killed our candidates across the board. These statistics will show you what I'm talking about:
"A survey of 1200 likely voters taken in 12 swing districts this past Sunday and Monday might explain why Republicans might have a long night ahead of them. The veteran GOP pollster says he has "never seen anything like it." Asked who is more likely to cut taxes for the middle class - 42 percent said Democrats, 29 picked Republicans. Who is more likely to reduce the deficit? 47 - Democrats, 22 - Republicans. And, who is more likely to control spending? Democrats - 38, Republicans - 21. In the past, even if Republicans didn't win some race or another, they were more trusted on taxes and spending issues."
That's right, according to the public, the Democratic Party is the party of tax cuts, deficit reduction, and fiscal responsibility. That just goes to show you how badly this, "compassionate conservatism/big government Republican" strategy that Republicans in Congress have pursued has hurt the GOP.
This is exactly what happens when you have a party that says, "Screw principles, let's just do whatever seems to poll well in order to stay in power.
Yesterday Gave Us A Short Preview Of What The Next Two Years Are Going To Be Like
Democrats are planning to meet with George McGovern to try to figure out how to surrender to the terrorists in Iraq by June:
George McGovern, the former senator and Democratic presidential candidate, said Thursday that he will meet with more than 60 members of Congress next week to recommend a strategy to remove U.S. troops from Iraq by June.
John "Okinawa" Murtha is trying to take the relatively moderate Steny Hoyer's leadership position:
"Current Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) was not similarly hesitant, formally announcing his bid for the Majority Leader’s office early Wednesday morning and confidently predicting that he will secure the post when Democrats vote in leadership election on Nov. 16.
“I think I’m going to win,” Hoyer said in an interview Wednesday. The Maryland lawmaker, who has served as Minority Whip since 2003, said “over a majority” of House incumbents as well as newly-elected lawmakers “have indicated that they would be supportive of me.”
But Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) — who stunned fellow lawmakers when he announced in June that he would campaign for the Majority Leader post against Hoyer — re-affirmed his own interest in the office Wednesday.
“I’m working diligently now trying to convince people that I’d make a good balance” to the leadership team, Murtha said in an interview with National Public Radio.
Charles Rangel, the man who's about to take over the incredibly powerful House Ways and Means committee insulted everyone who lives in Mississippi. Of course, if you'd asked him about South Carolina, Arkansas, Georgia -- anywhere in the South, he probably would have said exactly the same thing because a lot of Northern liberals tend to look down on the South:
Rangel, D-N.Y., was quoted in a Thursday article in The New York Times, saying: "Mississippi gets more than their fair share back in federal money, but who the hell wants to live in Mississippi?"
Just prepare yourself because stories of this sort are going to be an every day occurrence for the next 2 years. It doesn't matter how much the Democrats talk about being moderate. It doesn't matter that a lot of the Democrats who beat Republicans on Tuesday were moderates. Liberals run the show in the Democratic Party and they're going to behave just as obnoxiously as the left has over the last couple of years. But, this time around, they're going to be the people in charge.
Q&A Friday #53
Today will be Q&A Friday #53 at RWN.
So, if there's a subject you've been wanting me to tackle or an issue you want to hear my opinion on, just ask your question in the comments section. Your question can be about politics, ideology, history, blogging, RWN, from a liberal, conservative, or libertarian perspective; heck, it can even be about movies, music, literature, or TV. Then, today, I'll select some of the more interesting questions and answer them.
Ask away!
PS: Sorry that I forgot to put the questions up until so late.
Excerpt Of The Day: Regrettably, Khamenei Is Right
Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Friday called U.S. President George W. Bush's defeat in congressional elections a victory for Iran.
Bush has accused Iran of trying to make a nuclear bomb, being a state sponsor of terrorism and stoking sectarian conflict in Iraq, all charges Tehran denies.
"This issue (the elections) is not a purely domestic issue for America, but it is the defeat of Bush's hawkish policies in the world," Khamenei said in remarks reported by Iran's student news agency ISNA on Friday.
"Since Washington's hostile and hawkish policies have always been against the Iranian nation, this defeat is actually an obvious victory for the Iranian nation." -- Reuters
Republican Leadership Endorsements
For whatever it's worth -- which is probably not very much -- here's who I'm rooting for to take control in some of these leadership positions in the House:
Mike Pence for Minority Leader: Other than on illegal immigration, he's like a young Newt Gingrich. While his illegal immigration position is a reason for concern, he's managed to get Tom Tancredo behind him, which is a strong indication that he must be willing to take a hard line stand on the issue to attain a leadership position. So, Pence is the candidate to root for if you're looking for a reform minded conservative who wants to take a stand on principle. (Since that's the case, I support Pence for the Minority Leader position).
John Shadegg for House Minority Whip: Shadegg is a principled, reform minded, hard nosed conservative and to tell the truth, I'd probably back him against anybody in the House, for anything. Getting him as the House Minority Whip would be a dream come true for conservatives who are sick and tired of "big government Republicans." If Shadegg were to lose to Roy Blount, who represents a "business as usual" approach to governing, it would be an indication that the Republicans in the House learned absolutely nothing from the crushing loss they suffered last Tuesday.
Michael Steele for RNC Chairman: Ken Mehlman was actually a very good RNC chairman. He was a phenomenal fund raiser, he reached out non-stop to black Americans, and he is a reliable, charismatic spokesman for the Republican Party. Although I didn't agree with everything that the RNC did, I think he was a competent leader who did the best he could given what the Republicans on Capitol Hill were giving him to work with.
Now, Michael Steele is getting a serious look as a possible replacement for Mehlman. Steele, who lost despite running a brilliant campaign, would also be a reliable, charismatic spokesman for the Republican Party and I think it's likely that he would have more success than Ken did in reaching out to black Americans. The only question I have about Steele is whether he can raise money like Ken did, but given that Steele seems popular with the conservative base and almost managed to achieve fund raising parity with his opponent, Ben Cardin, in deep blue Maryland, I think he could handle that portion of the job, too. So, I think it would be great news if Michael Steele were to accept the RNC's offer of the chairmanship.
Daily News For Nov 10, 2006
Domestic
Hoyer, Murtha Battle For Leadership Post
George McGovern, The Former Senator And Democratic Presidential Candidate, Said Thursday That He Will Meet With More Than 60 Members Of Congress Next Week To Recommend A Strategy To Remove U.S. Troops From Iraq By June
Iraqi President Says Democrats Told Him They Will Not Pull Out Quickly
Bolton Unlikely To Win Senate Approval
Congressional Republican Leadership Elections
Charles Rangel: "Mississippi Gets More Than Their Fair Share Back In Federal Money, But Who The Hell Wants To Live In Mississippi?"
Mehlman to Step Down From RNC Post
RNC asks Steele to replace Mehlman
Bill Maher Tells Larry King That RNC Chair Ken Mehlman Is Gay (There Have Been Libs Making That Accusation For A Long Time)
Students At Orange Coast College College In Cali Ban Pledge Of Allegiance (Repulsive)
An Army Lieutenant Who Challenged The Bush Administration's Reasons For Going To War In Iraq And Then Refused To Deploy To The Country Will Face A Court Martial Trial (Applause)
Sen. Lincoln Chafee May Leave GOP. He Said, Adding That He Stayed With The Gop Largely Because It Allowed Him To Bring Federal Dollars Home To Rhode Island. (I Am So Glad He Lost)
Sen. Reid Backs Lieberman for Homeland Security Chairmanship (The Lefty Bloggers Will Flip =D)
Rasmussen Checks Their Polling Results In The Senate (Very Accurate)
Foreign
Socialists, Radicals, And Malcontents All Across The World Are Excited By The Democratic Victory
1600 Young British Muslims Under Mi5 surveillance for plotting terror
Rumsfeld: History Will Judge U.S. Right On Iraq
Columns
Hugh Hewitt Interviews Tony Snow: There Is No Timetable For Building The Fence And Bush Still Favors Amnesty
Ann Coulter: Historic Victory for Diebold!
Robert Novak: Gates Lacks Defense Experience, Views On Iraq Unknown
Victor Davis Hanson: Rethinking Illegal Immigration
The WSJ: The House GOP Needs A New Generation Of Leaders
Left-Overs
Pics From The CNN Blogger Get Together
THREE Christian high school girls were beheaded as a Ramadan "trophy" by Indonesian militants who conceived the idea after a visit to Philippines jihadists
'Aliens Could Attack At Any Time' Warns Former British Head Of The Ministry Of Defence UFO project, Nick Pope
Website Of The Day: Hog On Ice
November 09, 2006
Tom Tancredo To Endorse Mike Pence For Minority Whip
Earlier today, I frowned on the idea of seeing Mike Pence move into a leadership position, despite the fact that he's a hard nosed, reform minded, fiscal conservative, because Pence proposed an absolutely horrible amnesty plan last session.
Well, there's been some news on that front. I have gotten confirmation from a highly trusted source inside Tom Tancredo's office that Tancredo will be endorsing Pence. Since, in my book, Tom Tancredo is the gold standard on illegal immigration, that turns me around 180 degrees. That's because if Tanc is going to support Pence, it means that Pence must have given him some reassurances about how he'd handle illegal immigration. Otherwise, there's no way Tom Tancredo would support him.
So, I am now officially reversing my stance and rooting for Mike Pence to be the new Minority Leader in the House.
What Should Republican Principles Be?
A political party should have a set of abiding principles that will help guide its representatives towards where they should stand on the issues. If members of that party lose sight of those principles, it becomes all too easy for them to simply make bad decisions based on the shifting political winds of the moment. So, with that in mind, here are some the Republican Party principles that GOPers in Congress should keep in mind when they're trying to decide what to do in Washington.
Among other things, the Republican Party should be:
The "America First" party.
The capitalist party.
The daddy party
The law and order party.
The party of free trade.
The party of honest government and reform.
The party of low taxes.
The party of moral values.
The party of optimism.
The party of personal responsibility.
The party of small government.
The party of strong national defense.
The party that believes in defending America.
The party that believes in sticking to the Constitution as closely as possble.
The party that's friendly to Christians.
The party that believes the business of America is business.
The party of fiscal responsibility.
The patriotic party.
The pro-life party (added after a suggestion from the comment section)
Republican Leadership Follies
After the sort of crushing loss that the GOP experienced on Tuesday, it seems to be very natural to reach out to new leadership in the House and Senate. However, I'm not sure that some of the "new faces" running for leadership positions would be much of an improvement.
For example, Mike Pence is going to be running for Minority Leader. While Pence has enormous credibility on spending issues, he has also been a huge advocate of amnesty for illegal aliens. Is putting someone who has been one of the biggest advocates of rewarding illegal aliens for breaking our laws into a position of leadership in the House really a step forward? I don't think so.
In the Senate, Trent Lott is running for the Minority Whip position. Again, you have a guy who most conservatives thought was ineffective as Majority Leader, a guy who was run out of leadership under a cloud over racism accusations, a guy who played a role in setting up the Gang of 14 compromise, and a guy who said, "I'll just say this about the so-called porkbusters. I'm getting damn tired of hearing from them. They have been nothing but trouble ever since Katrina."
If Lott and Pence turn out to be the "new leadership," I'm not sure that the Republicans in Congress learned much from the failure of the "old leadership."
When The Republican Party Takes It On The Chin, So Does Conservatism
My pal Ivy J. Sellers over at Human Events wrote an article called Conservatism Was Not Defeated and while I agree with 98% of what she wrote, I have a problem with the title of the piece, even though the sentiments it expresses have been commonly heard around the blogosphere since the election.
Sure, Republicans didn't get in trouble because they were too conservative, they got in trouble because they weren't conservative and principled enough. While that's true, make no mistake about it -- conservatism was defeated on Tuesday because the Republican Party is the imperfect vehicle used to implement conservative policies.
Now, maybe you think that's just semantics or a minor point, but it's not. Just as the Republican Party can't win without conservatives, conservatism cannot win without the Republican Party. When the Republican Party cratered on Tuesday, the ability of conservatives to shape and influence government policy cratered with it.
That's an important thing to understand because a lot of people on the right, I'm not talking about Ivy here, seem to have the mistaken impression that the fate of conservatism and the Republican Party are not intertwined. So, they errantly believe that if the Republican Party loses an election, conservatism isn't affected or if they go off and vote for some loser Third Party, that they're still doing their part to move conservatism forward. Sorry, but that's just not true.
Although merely having Republicans in power doesn't guarantee that a conservative agenda will be enacted, for a conservative agenda to be enacted, Republicans need to be in power.
The Gang Of 14 Debacle Comes Back To Bite The GOP
I like John Podhoretz, but the spin he's trying to get over here could not possibly be more wrong:
"Hey, gang of 14 haters. With Republicans in the minority, can you say right now you're sorry that the Senate rules still allow for a filibuster?"
#1) Because the Republicans in the Senate foolishly refused to pull the trigger on the nuclear option when they had a chance, Bush is going to be in a really tight spot if another Supreme Court opening comes available in the final two years of his term.
That's because the "Gang of 14" deal is no longer operative and since the GOP no longer has a majority, there is obviously no way that they can now change the Senate rules to block Democratic filibusters. That means if, let's say Bush appoints a conservative judge and all the Republicans vote for that judge, along with a Democrat or two to get the number of Senators approving over 50, the Democrats can still choose to block that judge with a filibuster and there won't be a thing that the GOP can do about it.
#2) If, in let's say 2008, the Democrats are still in control of the Senate and let's say a Democratic President takes over, the Republican ability to filibuster a Democratic SCOTUS nominee means absolutely nothing for two reasons.
First off, the Republicans have never filibustered to keep a SCOTUS nominee off the court and after probably half of them have now gone on the record calling the maneuver unconstitutional, they're certainly not going to switch directions 180 degrees in 2008 and filibuster a Democratic President's pick.
The second thing to remember is that just because the GOP was too soft and dumb to use the nuclear option when they had the opportunity doesn't mean the Democrats would make the same mistake. If, somehow, someway, in say 2008, the GOP filibustered Hillary Clinton's appointment of Anita Hill to the Supreme Court and the Democrats had a majority of Senate seats, they'd simply use the nuclear option and put a stop to it. And guess what? The left wing activists and the MSM would cheer them wildly for doing so.
Some of us tried to point out how badly Senator EgoMcCainiac, Mike DeWine, Lincoln Chafee, and the other weenies in the Gang-of-14 were screwing us way back when, but a lot of people didn't pay attention. Now, we're out of power and we may end up losing the opportunity to have a majority originalist Supreme Court because of the foolishness of 7 Republican Senators.
Perversely, Could The GOP Loss Be Good For Conservative Talk Radio And The Conservative Blogosphere?
In his latest column, Brian Maloney writes:
"Even before the final returns had come in last night, it was clear that Republicans had been handed a defeat in the House of Representatives and if they do manage to hang on to the Senate, it will be by a thread, at best. Clearly ticked off at the party's leadership and President Bush, voters were in a testy mood and took it out at the ballot box.
So while it's a lousy day to be a Republican Party insider, it actually brings great news for conservative talk radio. In fact, this shot in the arm couldn't have come at a better time. Now, it's up to the medium's programmers to capitalize on the new environment. Are you ready?
...Now, a combination of all of the elements that led to talk radio's last big surge are back in place: the familiar bogeymen in power, now represented by Democrats Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, a worried, highly motivated conservative base looking to recapture in 2008 what has been lost in 2006 and even a wide open presidential contest, with no clear favorite on either side. For big audience gains, it’s a perfect storm.
As Republicans are instantly snapped out of their previous complacency, this is a recipe for unprecedented ratings success. Now in majority leadership positions, Democrats will be making decisions that conservative talkers are directly able to criticize.
For Rush Limbaugh and others, it's a new lease on life. No longer is it a matter of merely attacking what Democrats might do if in power, it's instead a bona fide reality, which is very likely to motivate conservatives to listen more often. Now, there will be an endless supply of fodder."
This is not the first time I have heard that theory, although the last time someone offered it up, it was being applied to the leftie bloggers.
A while back, I was talking with a Republican operative who closely follows the blogosphere and I mentioned that I was always a little puzzled as to why the liberal blogosphere as a whole was significantly bigger than the conservative blogosphere, especially since, in my opinion, some of the biggest websites on the left really aren't very good.
For instance, setting ideology aside, the fare on the main page of Daily Kos is usually very dull. And although Eschaton has perked up a bit, for a while, the left-wing version of Instapundit, Atrios, was just going through the motions and posting lots of open threads and lame links.
Still, you can't argue with their success. Both of those blogs have proven that they can draw and hold a big audience and the left side of the blogosphere as a whole has been more successful than the right.
Why?
The Republican operative said that in his opinion, it all came down to losing and anger. The Democrats were out of power, they were deeply unhappy about it, and they wanted to commiserate with other like-minded souls. So, they sought out these liberal blogs.
If that theory is correct, and I tend to think that it is, then it means that the right side of the blogosphere is going to experience a boom because of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Company coming into power.
It's too bad that theory is going to be tested under these lousy circumstances, with the GOP getting pounded into the ground, but over the next year or two, we're going to get to see if there's any merit to this theory.
Don't Throw John Bolton Under The Bus
There is already speculation now that John Bolton is going to get the ax next because there's no way that the Democrats will ever agree to confirm him.
But, Bolton isn't a political liability and he's done a fine job at the UN. So, instead of canning him, why shouldn't Bush publicly urge the Democrats to confirm him in a display of bipartisanship. Yeah, I know -- Democrats and bipartisanship, ha, ha, ha. But, just because the Democrats and the mainstream media define compromise as Republicans caving and moving to the Democratic position doesn't mean that Republicans should agree.
Why shouldn't Bush come out and say that Bolton has done a fine job of fighting corruption, standing up for American interests, and making a real effort to try to reform an almost completely dysfunctional institution? Then, let the Democrats explain why we need to go along to get along at the UN. The truth is that the Democrats didn't have any substantial reasons to oppose Bolton in the first place, it was all just knee jerk "oppositionalism." Now that Bolton has proven himself at the UN for a while, they have absolutely no reason to vote against him other than to stick it to Bush.
Come on, W, stick to your guns! Even if you lose on Bolton, it's better to go down swinging than just capitulate to the Democrats "just because."
Quote Of The Day: The Reps Lost And The Dems Won For The Same Reason
"The Republicans lost and the Democrats won for the same reason -- they distanced themselves from their base." -- Dave S. from Tim Blair's comment section Via Instapundit & Eject!Eject!Eject!
November 08, 2006
An Autopsy On The Remains Of The GOP Majority
There were a lot of factors that played into the GOP's crushing loss last night. The most important of them are as follows:
Bush's Approval Rating: Unfortunately, George Bush seems to be operating under the assumption that his approval rating is irrelevant since he doesn't have to run for office again. On issue after issue, he has taken wildly unpopular stands, seemingly without regard to the political fall-out. That has proven to be very unwise not only because Bush turned out to be an albatross around the neck of GOP candidates all around the country, but because as he grew more unpopular, he lost the ability, across the board, to effectively press his agenda.
Harriet Miers: Conservatives who had a lot of qualms about Bush's domestic agenda were thrilled when Sandra Day O'Connor stepped down from the Supreme Court because they felt like their support of Bush was finally about to pay off. However, when George Bush passed over a bevy of excellent candidates to select an unqualified crony for the Supreme Court, the conservative commentariat, for the first time, went into open rebellion against George Bush. Given that the selection of a Supreme Court Justice should have been an opportunity to put some salve on the wounds of conservatives who were unhappy with the Bush Presidency, it was a tremendous missed opportunity. Moreover, given that after Miers withdrew, Samuel Alito made it through the confirmation process in the Senate rather easily, the selection of Miers appeared to be an enormous unforced error by Bush.
If Bush Won't Defend Himself, Then Who Will: When George Bush first came into office, the American people were sick and tired of the venom of the Clinton years. Also, after 9/11, George Bush's approval ratings shot up to stratospheric levels. Because of those two factors, Bush could afford to simply ignore Democratic attacks without worrying about getting hurt too much.
However, in his second term, after his approval ratings came back down to earth, the Democratic attacks against George Bush started to work. Yet, Bush ignored them, just as he did in his first term. Eventually what started to happen was that the Democrats landed damaging haymaker after haymaker on George Bush while he refused to fight back. A prime example would be the Democrats' Hurricane Katrina spin. The incompetence of the local government in Louisiana was completely ignored and every mistake they made was pinned on the Bush Administration. Meanwhile, for the most part, W. just stood there and took the damaging hit.
Illegal Immigration: It's likely that no issue had more of a negative impact on Republican turnout than illegal immigration. In fact, for a while on the right side of the blogosphere, it was rare to run across a post about illegal immigration that didn't feature a handful of commenters promising not to vote for the GOP this year to punish the Republicans for pushing an amnesty plan. Regrettably, the people who bore the brunt of that protest vote were the Republicans in the House, who stood firm on illegal immigration. Moreover, in a cycle where most of the competitive races seemed to feature both the Republican and Democratic candidate promising to be tough on illegal immigration, having a Republican President who was the biggest proponent of an amnesty plan helped undercut the credibility of GOP candidates on the issue.
Gas Prices: The fact that so many Americans had to spend an extra $15-$20 every week to fill up the tank was such an irritant to people that I believe it had a lot to do with masking the strength of the economy. People do vote their pocketbooks and the extra money from that pocketbook that went towards gas really hurt the GOP.
National Security Slippage: The biggest issue of the 2004 election cycle was national security and that, of course, benefitted the GOP. However, we're now more than 5 years out from 9/11 and there hasn't been a major attack in the US, which has made people a bit complacent. Then there's the fact that North Korea's nuclear program is still ongoing , Iran is still building nukes, and the Bush Administration supported a sham of UN Agreement that handcuffed Israel and allowed Hezbollah to rearm . Moreover, we can't forget that the sort of progress many people expected in Iraq just hasn't materialized and that has caused the American people a considerable amount of angst. Put it all together and the national security issue lost a lot of the potency that it had for the GOP in 2004 and may have, in some races, turned out to be a negative overall for Republicans.
Out-Of-Control Spending: Conservatives expect that one of the highest priorities for Republicans in Washington will be cutting wasteful spending and getting the deficit under control -- but that message doesn't seem to have resonated with a lot of big government Republicans in Washington and there were a couple of defining moments that clearly showed that to be the case. The first was when then Majority Leader Tom DeLay declared that the GOP had achieved an "ongoing victory" against wasteful spending. That was bad enough. But, the "Bridge to Nowhere" added injury to insult. Conservatives were horrified to find out that their representatives in Washington were championing a three hundred million dollar bridge to an island in Alaska with 50 people living on it and they became even more disgusted when, despite an uproar over the wasted money, Republicans in the Senate pigheadedly continued to support the project.
Republicans Behaving Badly: If you look at the House, you'll see that a lot of the most challenging races were caused by scandals of some sort. Duke Cunningham and Bob Ney went to jail. Tom DeLay left Congress under an ethical cloud. To vote for Joe Negron, voters had to punch page predator Mark Foley's name on the ballot. Tom Reynolds and Deborah Pryce both had tough races because of their connection to Foley. Don Sherwood was accused not just of having a mistress, which was bad enough, but of trying to strangle her. The FBI investigated Curt Weldon's daughter because they believed Weldon might be delivering kickbacks to her firm. In fact, he GOP was so tin eared this election cycle that they even managed to turn a Democratic scandal to their disadvantage. When Democrat William Jefferson was caught with bribe money in his freezer and the FBI raided his office, the Republican leadership in the House took the side of the crooked Democratic Congressman over the FBI. Put it all together and not only did these issues cost the GOP a lot of individual seats, it painted a particularly unflattering portrait of an arrogant and corrupt party to the voters.
Summary: The bad news is that last the American people rejected the Republican Party. The good news is that they didn't do that because they rejected conservative principles, they rejected the Republican Party, for the most part, for not living up to those principles. That is a problem that can be corrected, especially since the voters don't like the Democratic Party very much either.
Donald Rumsfeld's Resignation
When Donald Rumsfeld became Secretary of Defense, he made an effort to change the military into a faster, sleeker force more capable of dealing with the sort of post Cold-War battles that we're likely to fight today. Combine the sort of bureaucratic infighting that effort surely prompted with the fact that Rumsfeld is an extremely pushy, demanding sort of boss and it was inevitable that Rumsfeld would make a lot of enemies at the Pentagon.
Then, of course, there was the war. As the war in Iraq has grown steadily less popular, Rumsfeld made a whole new set of foes and the temptation to get rid of him for political reasons must have increased significantly over time for Bush.
Now, after a crushing defeat in the election, with old Republican allies like Richard Perle calling Rumsfeld incompetent, with the Military Times calling for Rumsfeld's dismissal, and with even some Republicans in Congress calling for Rummy to go, the pressure on Bush to get rid of him must have been enormous. Add to that the fact that by getting rid of Rumsfeld, it makes it much easier for Bush to credibly say to the American people, "Hey, we're changing strategies in Iraq and we think that we're going to make progress."
Personally, I like Rumsfeld a lot, think he was good for the military, and think he did a better job in Iraq than he has gotten credit for. However, Bush has allowed himself to become so politically weakened, that he probably felt he had no choice but to toss Rumsfeld over the side. I'm not thrilled with that development, but I'm not going to criticize Bush for it either. He did what he felt like he had to do and Rumsfeld's replacement, Robert Gates, seems like a competent enough fellow.
The truth is that Donald Rumsfeld probably deserved better, but that could be said of a lot of people who end up out of jobs in Washington. It's just the nature of the beast in politics.
A Teleconference With Congressman Jeff Flake And the Club For Growth's Pat Toomey
I just got off of a teleconference with Congressman Jeff Flake and Pat Toomey from the Club for Growth. Here are my notes (not quotes) from the teleconference:
Jeff Flake: This disastrous election we just had wasn't a result of the war or the Foley scandal, it was because we as a party need a course correction. Earmarking really came back to bite us. I think we Republicans simply lost our brand name. We are no longer considered to be the party of limited government and that came back to hurt us badly.
Pat Toomey: This election wasn't a repudiation of conservatism, it was a repudiation of Republicans. We did a Sunday night poll in the seats we thought were most likely to switch. They didn't believe the GOP was the party of limited government and fiscal discipline. When we asked which party was the party of big government, the Republican Party won that by 11 points over Democrats.
In response to a question, Flake said that he thinks there needs to be a change in leadership.
Question from me: To convince the voters we're serious about fiscal conservatism again, do we need to push a big idea like the Balanced Budget Amendment or do we need to nibble away at it an earmark at a time.
Jeff Flake: For us to have credibility on the big ideas, we need to push the little ideas, too. But, we should do both.
Pat Toomey: We're not wild about the Balanced Budget Amendment. We think it could end up being an excuse to raise taxes. We do need to call the Democrats on fiscal responsibility issues. They've been saying that's what they believe, so let's support them on fiscal responsibility issues and see if they'll put their money where their mouth is.
A Teleconference With Congressman Jack Kingston
A little earlier, I was in on a teleconference with Congressman Jack Kingston and quite a few other bloggers. Here are some notes (not quotes) about what Kingston had to say:
-- Lessons learned: We've got to go back to the Contract with America. We've got to have a clear platform.
-- I don't think the Dems can hold together. They have a fairly moderate batch of Dems that won with support for heavily left wing groups.
-- There's going to be a lot of kicking the can down the road. The Dems are going to say they need the presidency to act. Republicans will say they need the majority again.
-- I think it will be very difficult for the Dems to pass a budget because they will have a lot of IOU's to these liberal interest groups and some of these new Democratic members aren't going to want to go along with it.
-- I don't have any preferences for a Majority Leader, but people are in the mood for change.
-- Kingston thinks the GOP will sort of rally around a central platform, but also hopes that the Democrats turn voters off.
-- The Dems haven't defined themselves yet. Are they going to be liberal and pass a lot of bills they know the Senate won't pass or are they going to try to play moderate?
-- Because Republicans aren't in the majority, they're not as relevant as they were yesterday. That means Republican legislators need to reach out more to bloggers in an effort to get their message out.
-- To me, the hope with illegal immigration is with the enforcement powers of the executive branch, not the House now. (Hawkins' note: That's pretty scary because Bush has been the single biggest bad actor on the illegal immigration issue)
Comparing RWN's Pre-Election Projections To The Actual Results
I estimated the GOP would lose 5 seats in the Senate and 22-29 in the House. Unfortunately, it looks like I was a touch too optimistic. Here's a short comparison of my initial analysis to the actual results:
State: Michigan
Competitors: Debbie Stabenow (D) vs. Mike Bouchard (R)
My Analysis: 90/10 -- Likely Democratic Retention.
Result: Stabenow 57% vs. Bouchard 41%
State: Minnesota
Competitors: Mark Kennedy (R) vs, Amy Klobuchar (D)
My Analysis: 90/10 -- Likely Democratic Retention.
Result: Klobuchar 58% vs. Kennedy 38%
State: New Jersey
Competitors: Robert Menendez (D) vs. Tom Kean (R)
My Analysis: 90/10 -- Likely Democratic Retention.
Result: Menendez 53% vs. Kean 45%
State: Ohio
Competitors: Mike DeWine (R) vs. Sherrod Brown (D)
My Analysis: 90/10 -- Likely Democratic Pick-up.
Result: Brown 56% vs. DeWine 44%
State: Pennsylvania
Competitors: Rick Santorum (R) vs. Bob Casey
My Analysis: 90/10: -- Likely Democrat Pick-Up.
Result: Casey 59% vs. Santorum 41%
State: Tennessee
Competitors: Bob Corker (R) vs. Harold Ford
My Analysis: 90/10 -- Likely Republican Retention.
Result: Corker 51% vs. Ford 48%
State: Connecticut
Competitors: Joe Lieberman (I) vs. Ned Lamont
My Analysis: 90/10 -- Lieberman retains and unfortunately, votes for Democratic control of Congress.
Result: Lieberman 50% vs. Lamont 40%
State: Washington
Competitors: Maria Cantwell (D) vs. Mike McGavick (R)
My Analysis: 90/10 -- Likely Democratic Retention.
Result: Cantwell 58% vs. McGavick 39%
State: Maryland
Competitors: Michael Steele (R) vs. Ben Cardin (D)
My Analysis: 75/25 -- Leaning Democratic Retention.
Result: Cardin 54% vs. Steele 44%
State: Missouri
Competitors: Jim Talent (R) vs. Claire McCaskill (D)
My Analysis: 50/50 -- Toss-up.
Result: McCaskill 50% vs. Talent 47%
State: Montana
Competitors: Conrad Burns (R) vs. Jon Tester (D)
My Analysis: 50/50 -- Toss-up.
Result: Tester 49% vs. Burns 48%
State: Rhode Island
Seat Currently Held By: Lincoln Chafee (R)
Competitors: Lincoln Chafee (R) vs. Sheldon Whitehouse (D)
Last Poll: Mason Dixon: Chafee + 1
Latest RCP poll spread: Whitehouse +7.8
October Polling: Whitehouse wins 8, Chafee wins 1
My Analysis: 50/50 -- Toss-up.
Result: Whitehouse 53% vs. Chafee 47%
State: Virginia
Competitors: George Allen (R) vs. James Webb (D)
My Analysis: 50/50 -- Toss-up.
Result: Webb 50% vs. Allen 49%
Although I did say that I thought the Dems had a small edge in all the toss-up races, I thought the GOP had a good shot to pull out a couple of them -- and who knows, maybe they will. There will be a recount in Virginia and Tester is up on Burns by less than 2000 votes with 1% of the vote left to be counted.
In the House, which was harder to call because of the scarcity of polling data, here was how I saw it playing out:
Republican Seats Leaning Democratic Takeover
AZ-08: Randy Graf (R.) vs. Gabrielle Giffords (D.) (Graf lost)
CT-05: Rep. Nancy Johnson (R.) vs. Chris Murphy (D.) (Johnson lost)
CO-7: Rick O'Donnell (R.) vs. Ed Perlmutter (D.) (O'Donnell lost)
FL-13: Vern Buchanan (R.) vs. Christine Jennings (D.) (Buchanan won)
FL-16: Joe Negron (R.) vs. Tim Mahoney (D.) (Negron lost)
FL-22: Rep. Clay Shaw (R.) vs. Ron Klein (D.) (Shaw lost)
IA-01: Mike Whalen (R.) vs. Bruce Braley (D.) (Whalen lost)
IN-2: Rep. Chris Chocola (R.) vs. Joe Donnelly (D.) (Chocola lost)
IN-8: Rep. John Hostettler (R.) vs. Brad Ellsworth (D.) (Hostettler lost)
NC-11: Rep. Charles Taylor (R.) vs. Heath Shuler (D.) (Taylor lost)
NY-20: Rep. John Sweeney (R.) vs. Kirsten Gillibrand (D.) (Sweeney lost)
NY-29: Rep. Randy Kuhl (R.) vs. Eric Massa (D.) (Kuhl won)
OH-01: Rep. Steve Chabot (R.) vs. John Cranley (D.) (Chabot won)
OH-18: Joy Padgett (R.) vs. Zack Space (D.) (Padgett lost)
PA-6: Rep. Jim Gerlach (R.) vs. Lois Murphy (D.) (Gerlach won)
PA-7: Rep. Curt Weldon (R.) vs. Joe Sestak (D.) (Weldon lost)
PA-10: Rep. Don Sherwood (R.) vs. Chris Carney (D.) (Sherwood lost)
Republican-Held Seats That Are Toss-Ups
AZ-05: Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R.) vs. Harry Mitchell (D.) (Hayworth lost)
CA-11: Rep. Richard Pombo (R.) vs. Jerry McNerney (D.) (Pombo lost)
CT-2: Rep. Rob Simmons (R.) vs. Joe Courtney (D.) (Still 50/50, no winner declared)
CT-4: Rep. Chris Shays (R.) vs. Diane Farrell (D.) (Shays won)
CO-04: Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R.) vs. Angie Paccione (D.) (Musgrave won)
ID-01: Bill Sali (R) vs. Larry Grant (D) (Sali won)
IL-6: Peter Roskam (R.) vs. Tammy Duckworth (D.) (Roskam won)
IN-9: Rep. Mike Sodrel (R.) vs. Barron Hill (D.) (Sodrel lost)
KY-03: Rep. Anne Northup (R.) vs. John Yarmuth (D.) (Northup lost)
KY-04: Rep. Geoff Davis (R.) vs. Ken Lucas (D.) (Davis won)
NH-02: Rep. Charlie Bass (R.) vs. Paul Hodes (D.) (Bass lost)
NM-1: Rep. Heather Wilson (R.) vs. Patricia Madrid (D.) (Still 50/50, no winner declared)
NY-24: Ray Meier (R.) vs. Michael Arcuri (D.) (Meier lost)
NY-25: Rep. James Walsh (R.) vs. Dan Maffei (D.) (Walsh won)
OH-15: Rep. Deborah Pryce (R.) vs. Mary Jo Kilroy (D.) (Pryce won)
PA-08: Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick (R.) vs. Patrick Murphy (D.) (Still 50/50, no winner declared)
TX-22: Shelley Sekula-Gibbs (R.) vs. Nick Lampson (D.) (Sekula Gibbs lost)
VA-02: Rep. Thelma Drake (R.) vs. Phil Kellam (D.) (Drake won)
WI-08: John Gard (R.) vs. Steve Kagen (D.) (Gard lost)
Key Competitive Seats Leaning Toward Republican Retention
AZ-01: Rep. Rick Renzi (R.) vs. Ellen Simon (D.) (Renzi won)
CA-04: Rep. John Doolittle (R.) vs. Charlie Brown (D.) (doolittle won)
CA-50: Rep. Brian Bilbray (R.) vs. Francine Busby (D.) (Bilbray won)
CO-5: Doug Lamborn (R.) vs. Jay Fawcett (D.) (Lamborn won)
MN-01: Rep. Gil Gutknecht (R.) vs. Tim Walz (D.) (Gutknecht lost)
MN-06: Michele Bachmann (R.) vs. Patty Wetterling (D.) (Bachman won)
NJ-07: Rep. Mike Ferguson (R.) vs. Linda Stender (D.) Ferguson won
NY-26: Rep. Tom Reynolds (R.) vs. Jack Davis (D.) (Reynolds won)
NV-02: Dean Heller (R.) vs. Jill Derby (D.) (Heller won)
NV-03: Rep. Jon Porter (R.) vs. Tessa Hafen (D.) (Porter won)
OH-02: Rep. Jean Schmidt (R.) vs. Victoria Wulsin (D.) (Schmidt won)
WA-08: Rep. Dave Reichert (R.) vs. Darcy Burner (D.) (Reichert won)
WY-AL: Rep. Barbara Cubin (R.) vs. Gary Trauner (D.) (Still 50/50, no winner declared)
Not Listed:
KS-02: Ryun (R) lost to Borda (D)
PA-04: Hart (R) lost to Altmire (D)
NH-01: Jeb Bradley (R) lost to Shea-Porter (D)
My projection of 22-29 seats lost appears to have been very close, but just a tad too optimistic.
Quote Of The Day: A Little Perspective On The GOP's Loss Last Night
Since WWII, the party of the incumbent President has typically lost more than 30 seats in the House of Representatives and six seats in the Senate during the second midterm. In addition, in the five wartime congressional elections since 1860, the President’s party has lost an average of 32 House seats and five Senate seats." -- From an article quoted at the Corner
A Few Nuggets Of Good News From Last Night
There was precious little good news last night for Republicans, but there are a few pieces of silver lining shining out through the clouds:
-- The netroots favorite candidate, Ned Lamont, lost to Joe Lieberman in what could fairly be called a referendum on the war in Iraq.
-- Lincoln Chafee lost and other than John McCain, there was no Republican in the Senate who more richly deserved to be sent packing.
-- Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, who's one of my favorite Republicans out West, looks like he's going to just barely eke out a victory. At the moment, CNN shows him up by almost 14,000 votes with 99% of the precincts counted.
-- Sarah Palin, who has sort of a hot librarian look, is a huge improvement in almost every way over Frank Murkowski (R), whom she replaced.
-- On the ballot measures, Arizona approved English as a national language, Michigan prohibited Affirmative Action. In Colorado they voted against legalizing domestic partnership and also in Colorado, Idaho, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wisconsin, they banned same sex marriage.
-- Because of the loss last night, there are already some conservative reformers like Mike Pence and John Shadegg jockeying to takeover leadership positions in the House (Although I don't think it would be a good thing for Pence to acquire more power unless he pledges to abandon his amnesty plan).
Polipundit has a similar post up.
Correction: In the original draft of this post I incorrectly stated that Oregon and California passed parental notification laws. Perhaps that was because I was looking at old polling date or because I just made a mistake, but either way, both Oregon and California rejected parental notification laws.
Final Rightroots Tally
There was not a lot of good news on the Rightroots front last night (Only 2 out of 21 of our candidates won), but I guess that's to be expected in a year where no Republican challengers to Democratic incumbents in the House or Senate managed to get elected:
Here's the breakdown of how the candidates did (Rightroots candidate in bold):
House
(MN-06): Michele Bachmann 50% vs. Patty Wetterling 42%
(OH-6): Chuck Blasdel 39% vs. Charles Wilson 61%
(GA-12): Max Burns 49% vs. John Barrow 51%
(WI-08): John Gard 49% vs. John Gard 51%
(PA-12): Diana Irey 39% vs. John Murtha 61%
(IA-03): Jeff Lamberti 47% vs. Leonard Boswell 52%
(IL-08): David McSweeney 44% vs. Melissa Bean 50%
(NY-24): Ray Meier 45% vs. Michael Arcuri 54%
(SC-05): Ralph Norman 43% vs. John Spratt 57%
(CO-07): Rick O'Donnell 42% vs. Ed Perlmutter 55%
(IL-06) Peter Roskam 51% vs. Tammy Duckworth 49%
(TX-17) Van Taylor 40% vs. Chet Edwards 58%
(CO-3): Scott Tipton 37% vs. John Salazar 61%
(WV-01): Chris Wakim 36% vs. Alan Mollohan 64%
(IA-01): Mike Whalen 43% vs. Bruce Braley 55%
(IL-17): Andrea Lane Zinga 43% vs. Phil Hare 57%
Senate
(Michigan): Mike Bouchard 41% vs. Debbie Stabenow 57%
(New Jersey): Thomas Kean 45% vs. Bob Menendez 53%
(Minnesota): Mark Kennedy38% vs. Amy Klobuchar 58%
(Washington): Mike McGavick 39% vs. Maria Cantwell 58%
(Maryland): Michael Steele 44% vs. Ben Cardin 54%
Daily News For November 8, 2006
Elections
Democrats Capture House; Senate Still Up for Grabs -- But Leaning Towards A Democratic Take Over
Allen, Webb Headed for Va. Recount
1st Lady Speaker To Clean House. Pelosi Will Be 2nd In Line Of Presidential Succession
Arizona Approves English As An Official Language
South Dakotans Reject Tough Abortion Ban
Voters Keep Choosing To Protect Traditional Marriage. New Definitions Added In 7 States, 1 Vote Total Incomplete
Michigan Votes Affirmative Action Ban
Minnesota Sends First Muslim To Congress
Voting Complaints In 18 States. Problems With Electronics, Bomb Threat, Assault, Rage Against The Machine
Domestic
Pence Eyes Minority Leader Race; Shadegg Could Enter Whip Contest
Accuser In Duke Lacrosse Case Wanted Money, Co-Worker Says
"Absolutely True:" Rather Continues To Defend 60 Minutes TANG Story
Dean Baquet Was Forced To Resign As Editor Of The Los Angeles Times At The Request Of The Publisher After He Refused To Agree To Further Cuts Of His Editorial Staff
Foreign
Karaoke Bar Bombs Wound Five In Thailand
Hizbullah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah: "When We Were Young, I cannot Forget the Sight of American Forces leaving Vietnam, and the Americans Abandoning their Vietnamese Allies, I Anticipate the Same for our Region."
Columns
A NRO Symposium: What Happened?
John Stossel: Property Theft in America
Dennis Prager: Is A Gay Who Opposes Same-Sex Marriage A Hypocrite?
Michael Medved: Uncomfortable lessons from a disastrous night
Left-Overs
Britney Spears Files for Divorce
Bill Gates Says West Not Supplying Enough IT Talent
Video: If Michael Moore Did A Movie About Pearl Harbor
Website Of The Day: Townhall Blog
November 07, 2006
Rolling Key Race Results Thread
Sheldon Whitehouse has knocked off Lincoln Chafee. It's hard to get too upset about that one since Chafee was genuinely to the left of center and didn't even vote for Bush in 2004. Good riddance to bad rubbish on that one.
That means the other three key races to watch are Allen in VA, Burns in Montana, and Talent and Missouri. The Dems need to take 2 out of 3 of those races to take the Senate.
In the House.
IN-8: Rep. John Hostettler lost, which was expected.
IN-2: Rep. Chris Chocola lost, which was expected
KY-03: Anne Northup lost, which I had as a toss-up race.
So, unfortunately, the "glimmer of hope" post doesn't appear to be operative at the moment. There's not a lot of good news out there right now.
Update #1 at 9:54 PM: I love the Ned Lamont spin. Sure, he lost, but he changed the national conversation with his primary victory. Oh, so that netroots disaster was actually a "moral victory." Got cha!
On the bright side, FL-13, Buchanan (R) beat Jennings (D) for the old Katherine Harris seat which was a surprise because Jennings had consistently beaten him in poll after poll after poll.
Update #2 at 10:50 PM: Heath Shuler just knocked off Taylor in NC-11. Barron Hill. That's another toss-up race to the Dems. Joe Negron also came up just shy in FL-16, Mark Foley's old seat. That was a Democratic leaning seat. Don Sherwood in PA-10 is also going to lose. That was another Democratic leaner.
Update #3 at 11:01 PM: Nancy Johnson just lost in CT-05. That was another seat leaning towards the Dems. Unfortunately, so far, other than the Buchanan seat in Florida, the Dems have been winning every seat they should win plus a significant number of toss-ups. Geeze, it's not looking very good out there right now....In AZ-08, Giffords is now projected to lose as well. That was another Democratic leaner. In NY-20, John Sweeney is toast. That's another leaner. They also got IN-9, Sodrel, which was a toss-up.
Update #4 at 11:24 PM: The Maryland Senate race has been called for Cardin, but Steele is refusing to concede. Given that he's up by 12k votes with 48% of the votes counted and his support cuts across party lines in many areas, maybe he's on to something.
Update #5 at 12:31 PM: On the upside, even if Allen and Burns go down in addition to Chafee, DeWine, and Santorum, we still hold the Senate if Talent pulls it out and he's up by 3% with 69% of the precints in.
Still, all in all, it has been -- as expected -- a pretty lousy night for the GOP.
Update #6 at 12:45 PM: Good night. I'll be back early tomorrow and working. Until then, sleep well.
Insider's Cheat Sheet?
Via Rich Lowry at The Corner:
Here's information from a chart that GOP insiders...are using as a cheat sheet
Eight in the most likely gone category: PA-7, Weldon, OH-18, Ney open, IN-8, Hostettler, CO-7 Beauprez open, AZ-8, Kolbe open, NY-24, Boehlert open, PA-10, Sherwood, CT-4, Shays.
Eight in the expect to lose most of these unless something changes: TX-22, DeLay open, NC-11, Taylor (chart notes unfavorable trend in this race), IN-9, Sodrel, IN-2, Chocola (chart notes a favorable trend), FL-16, Foley open, OH-15, Pryce, PA-6, Gerlach, NH-2, Bass (unfavorable trend).
Twenty in the true toss-up category (I'm just citing districts because I'm tired of typing): IA-1, NY-20, WY, WI-8 (favorable trend), WA-8, VA-2, PA-8, NY-26 (favorable trend), NM-1, IL-6, FL-13, CA-50, CA-11, OH-1, ID-1, NY-25, MN-1, CO-5, OH-2, CA-4.
That's 36 seats total. In the first category, unfavorable trends are noted in 7 of the 8 races (AZ-8 is the only exception). In the third category, 13 out of the 30 races have unfavorable trends.
Also see the RWN list.
Is It Possible That The GOP Could Hold Onto The House?
Short Answer To The Question phrased in the title: Yes, but it's unlikely.
Long Answer: The available polling data seems to show that the GOP is going to lose the House and almost all the political analysts out there agree with that assessment. However, there is a small glimmer of hope for the GOP.
Right at the tail end of the campaign, multiple generic ballot polls have shown a movement towards the GOP. Here's the spin on that development from the GOP:
"The momentum continues with a fourth poll in recent days showing Republicans gaining ground on Democrats in the closing days of the election. James Carville and Stan Greenberg’s Democracy Corps poll (November 2-5) confirms the findings of three other polls released in the last two days that show Republicans gaining ground in their competitive district survey.
GENERIC BALLOT. Republicans have cut the margin from down 11 (41-52) last week to down only four (45-49) this morning.
PARTY IMAGE. Democracy Corps shows that Republicans have a better image rating than Democrats for the first time since early September. From their last poll, Republicans’ favorable/unfavorable ratio had improved a net-5 points while Democrats dropped a net-4 points.
HANDLING OF ISSUES. A big reason for Republican gains is that trust on key issues has increased over the past few weeks. Built on recent good economic news, Republicans handling on the economy has improved a net-9 points from a week ago. Republicans have also seen significant gains on handling of taxes (+7), Iraq (+7) and national security (+4).
GOP CAMPAIGNS MAKING IMPACT. Another significant reason for Republican gains can be found in the GOP’s 72-hour get out the vote program which is now in full swing. This poll showed that Republicans have made a greater impact than Democrats with TV ads (+6), mailings (+6), and phone calls (+6).
OTHER INDICATORS IMPROVE.
* Direction of the nation, otherwise known as “right track / wrong track”, improved a net-6 points from their previous poll.
* The President’s job approval has increased a net-5 points and Congressional Job Approval increased a net-12 points from their October 25-29 survey."
Now, you may be thinking, "Well gee, if the generic ballots show the GOP gaining ground, doesn't that mean that the GOP is going to overperform?"
The answer to that is not necessarily. For one thing, the generic ballot numbers often don't track well with election results. In other words, a five point movement one way or the other in the generic ballot numbers doesn't necessarily mean anything in any particular race. You can see that in the Senate polls where, for example, Republicans like Lincoln Chafee and Conrad Burns have closed right at the tail end of their campaigns while Democrats like James Webb and McCaskill have surged during the same time period.
So, even if there has been some sort of movement towards the GOP because of John Kerry's comments about the troops, Saddam being sent to the gallows, Republicans coming home at the last minute, or other factors, it's not a "rising tide lifts all boats," sort of thing.
However, because the House races are polled much less often than the Senate, it's possible that a "mini-wave" towards many of the GOP candidates could have been overlooked.
Now, do I think there has been a "mini-wave" towards the GOP over the last few days. My gut instinct says, "no," but I don't think you can completely discount the possibility. After all, if such a "mini-wave" were to happen, you would see the sort of movement in the generic balloting numbers that does appear to have happened.
So, if all these predictions turn out to be wrong and the GOP holds on the House by a nose -- which again, I don't think is going to happen -- that, along with the GOP's superb Get Out The Vote effort, will be the explanation for it.
A Teleconference with Ken Mehlman
I called in just a touch late to a teleconference with RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman today and for whatever reason, it took the attendant like 5 minutes to actually put me on with Ken. So, I missed his early remarks. Still, here's what Ken had to say (These are notes, not quotes, and many of these responses were prompted by questions.)
-- We've already seen some dirty tricks aimed at Republican candidates. Gil Gutknecht's HQ was egged, Poll workers have been charged with faking votes from dead people in TN. Tom Kean had keys broken off in the doors of his HQ today.
-- Don't pay attention to the exit polls when they come out. There's a long history of exit polls favoring the Democrats over the Republicans
-- The Steele / Cardin race is very close and Steele has the momentum.
- Montana and Michigan close late and both are very favorable environments towards Republicans right now. In the Burns race, one piece of good news is that the Undecided voters in Montana were 2 to 1 for Republicans. So, Burns is likely to pick-up a very high percentage of undecided voters.
-- The GOP has been pushing reform since Reagan and we've gotten away from that a little bit of late. We've done a lot of reform, but we need to do a lot more.
-- Kerry's comments about the military were a big deal and they did help the GOP quite a bit. Also, Iran testing long range missiles, Saddam being found guilty of war crimes, the New York Times revealing that Saddam was further along towards Nukes than we thought also probably has helped bring some more voters into the GOP column.
-- If I had to pick a shock the world race, where a GOP win could stun everyone, it would probably be Hawaii's 2nd Congressional District where we have a shot at an upset. A Michael Steele victory would be a big deal. Max Burns in Georgia is also an even money race.
God Help Black America If Republicans Run The Fulton County Commission
Via Redstate comes this insane commercial for Democrat John Eaves, who is "running to replace Republican Karen Handel as the Chairman of the Fulton County Commission, the county in which Atlanta exists."
If you boil the commercial down to its essence, it basically says that either black Americans should vote for John Eaves or the Republicans will use water hoses and dogs on black people today, just like the Democrats used to do back in the sixties.
At one point, it literally says that, "Your very life may depend," on electing John Eaves. So, in other words, it's vote for John Eaves or Republicans will be lynching black people all over Atlanta.
So what this ad is saying is that white Republicans want to murder black Americans. Really? The party of Condi Rice hates black people? The party of Colin Powell? The party of Clarence Thomas? The part of Michael Steele? The party of Thomas Sowell? The party of Larry Elder? The party of Walter Williams feels this way?
At some point, wouldn't you think that black Americans would start to get insulted by this sort of ad? Wouldn't you think that at some point, you'd start to regularly hear a lot of black Americans starting to say, "How stupid do the Democrats think we are? How about talking about issues instead of treating us like easily manipulated children?" Let's hope that day comes soon.
Make Sure To Vote
I know that on a day where the question isn't, "whether the GOP is going to take a beating," it's, "how bad is the beating going to be," it's easy to get demoralized and it's probably more than a little tempting to some people not to bother with voting. However, something Pat Riley once said seems particularly appropo under these circumstances:
"When you're playing against a stacked deck, compete even harder. Show the world how much you'll fight for the winner's circle. If you do, someday the cellophane will crackle off a fresh pack, one that belongs to you, and the cards will be stacked in your favor." -- Pat Riley
Whatever happens, keep your chin up, go out there and vote, and do everything you can within the moral and legal limits to help the GOP win today. Then, just remember that no matter what happens today, tomorrow, the GOP will get a chance to rise anew and start proving that we are the better Party once again.
PS: None of this applies to any liberals who happen to be reading. Liberals should spend the day sleeping late, relaxing, and watching Keith Olbermann rants on YouTube because as we've already heard over and over and over, the VRWC will just rig the election anyway. So, why should liberals even bother to vote?
Quote Of The Day: Spin Or A Chafee Betrayal In The Making?
This could be just spin to discourage Republicans from voting for Chafee or it could be genuine given what a huge RINO Chafee is. Either way, I really detest Chafee, so I don't have any qualms about posting it on here on election day:
I have a friend in Rhode Island—a Democrat torn between his affections for Lincoln Chafee and his desire to make Harry Reid majority leader. Over the weekend, my friend attended a Chafee event and cornered the senator. Now, my friend doesn't have a personal relationship with Chafee, but he put the question bluntly to him: Why should I stick with you in a race with so many national implications? Chafee pulled my friend aside, lowered his voice, and told him that he might not be a Republican for much longer.
This is just one report. Take it for whatever its worth. — Franklin Foe at The Plank via Sixers
| 
