Election 2012 tomorrow

This is a crucial turning point in the future of this country.

We have two choices.  We can either continue with the leftist policies of the last four years which have led to a sputtering economy, hostility towards entrepreneurs and job creators, alarming growth of dependency on government to be the primary caretakers of able-bodied adults, and a feckless foreign policy that has made the country appear weak in the eyes of allies and enemies alike.  Or not.

The petulant think-skinned man-child who has been an unmitigated Carter-like disaster wants another four years to, in his words, “finish the job”.  That scares the hell out of me.  What job does he want to finish?  Offing America?  But even if I’m being charitable, he’s saying that he needs another term to continue doing what he did in the first term.  Are you freaking kidding me??

Ignore the polls.  Right now, polls are showing a tie.  A president whose economic record has, according to these same polls, been perceived as abysmal by the electorate; who loses independents by double digits (anywhere from 15-22%); who saw a swing of -15% in the gender gap he enjoyed in 2008; whose party lags in enthusiasm by 15% to the GOP; who isn’t packing the house at campaign stops (even with Stevie Wonder headlining) while his opponent is welcomed by standing-room-only crowds (including outdoor amphitheaters in chilly Colorado cities and 30,000+ in PA)…THAT guy is TIED or slightly AHEAD, in polls with absurd Democrat oversamplings (in today’s CNN poll, and oversampling of D+11?)?  Seriously?

I doubt it.  Ignore the polls.  Everything feels like it’s on the side of the good guys (for those of you on the left, that would NOT be the Obamatons).  But it doesn’t matter what it FEELS like.  It only matters what IS.

The left and the MSM (pardon the redundancy) have been doing their part to convince you that their boy is gonna win.  The numbers TODAY aren’t bearing that out.  Don’t listen to them.  You do YOUR part: vote, and get your proper-thinking friends to get to the polls and vote, too.

In the end, the only poll that matters is the final poll after all the legitimate votes are legally and properly counted.  Maybe then, this country’s long national nightmare will finally be over and Obamunism will have been sent to the trash bin of history…where it belongs.  We’ll see.

Are national polls AND Ohio polls both right?

No way, says Josh Jordan.  Excellent read, so please check it out.  Excerpt:

In Ohio, Republicans tend to outperform their share of the national vote: In the last six presidential elections, only in 2004 has the Republican candidate performed worse in Ohio than he did nationally, and even that was a difference of only 0.3 percentage points. In the other five elections, the GOP candidate outperformed his margin of the national vote by an average of 3.1 percentage points. While it’s clearly possible for Republicans to perform worse in Ohio than nationally, it is very difficult to imagine a scenario where there is more than a point difference between them based on past elections. History would suggest Romney could not be up 2 points nationally while being down 2.1 in Ohio, which would mean that Republicans would be under-performing in Ohio by more than 4 points.
…
Both of these points suggest that it is more likely that either the national polls or the Ohio polls are wrong, rather than the possibility that both can be right. There is a big reason for this discrepancy: the partisan makeup of the Ohio polls.

As mentioned above, in current Ohio polls, Democrats have a party-ID sample advantage of 6.3 points. In 2008, Democrats had a 5-point turnout advantage in Ohio. That means that while national polls have the turnout advantage down 2.6 points, in Ohio it has actually increased 1.3 points. It is almost impossible to conclude that while the nationwide party-ID advantage of Democrats has dropped since the wave election of 2008, Ohio has actually increased over the last four years.

If that’s not enough, the Ohio polls have actually become more Democratic since the post-DNC polls that gave Obama the significant bounce that led many pundits to declare Romney’s chances in Ohio DOA. Of all Ohio polls from September 7 to September 19, Obama held an average lead of 4.2 points, with a Democratic party-ID advantage of 5.7 points. Today Obama leads by 2.1 points, with a party-ID advantage of 6.3 points. In the last month, while Romney has had surges in polls all over the country, the polling in Ohio has actually found more Democrats even while Obama’s lead was cut in half. …

Um…unlikely, to say the least.  Case in point: a new PPP (the Daily Kooks’) poll shows Oba-Mao with a +4 lead over Romney in OH…with a D+8 sample, even bigger than the big blue wave of 2008 (and +9 bigger than the R+1 that turned out during the red wave of 2010…so a 9% swing ONLY TWO SHORT YEARS AFTER the nation rebuked Obama? Really?).  So with an unrealistic +8 sample advantage over Republicans, the best B.O. can do is to only get HALF of those?

B.O. can’t win without Ohio.  Romney CAN, though it’s hard to imagine that he’d lose Ohio but pick off other “firewall” states needed to offset the difference (WI and either IA, NH, or NV, assuming CO continues its pro-Romney trend).

In the end, the only poll that matters is the one AFTER the votes are in.  But regardless of who wins, it will be a fun exercise to go back and look to see which pollsters were right and wrong, and see if they explain themselves.

Washington comPost poll shows tie with Romney and Obama…with a D+9 sample

For those of you on the left, that means the poll sampled 9% more Democrats than Republicans.  Which is fascinating, considering that the Big Blue Wave of 2008 showed Democrats outnumbering Republicans at the polls by 7%.  In other words, this new poll from the comPost samples an electorate that is MORE Democratic than the biggest Democratic wave EVER…and the best Obama can do with a 9% advantage in poll sampling is a TIE.

I normally don’t get too caught up in polls this far out.  After all, McCain was doing well against Obama at this time in 2008, and Carter was leading Reagan at this point in 1980, according to the polls.  We all know how both of those turned out.  But I do find polls like this one interesting, where they sample in such a way as to get the results that they seek.  Although I’m sure the comPost was hoping that a D+9 poll would have yielded better results for their boy.

As for the comPost: Nope, no liberal media bias!

CNN poll a product of “utter fantasy”

This is a great takedown of that CNN poll from yesterday that is wildly different from other recent polls.  In the CNN poll, Obama leads Romney 52%-43%.  In polls from two and three days before, Romney leads Obama in both, albeit within the margin of error.

Why am I talking about polls at this stage of the game?  Simple: media malpractice.  Excerpt of the takedown:

…That might not be the biggest problem with the poll, though. Its biggest problem is … math. Reader Raymond O did some math and asked a rather interesting set of questions in an e-mail last night about how CNN did theirs. First, let’s start with the topline results, as reported by CNN: Obama 52%, Romney 43% among registered voters, 53/41 among all respondents. If that’s the case, then the number of respondents in the latter case voting for Obama should be 538, and the number supporting Romney 416.

However, when reading the questions on page 3 of the poll report, that’s not at all what we see:

BASED ON 484 RESPONDENTS WHO PLAN TO VOTE FOR OBAMA — SAMPLING ERROR: +/- 4.5 PERCENTAGE PTS.
3. (Asked of Obama voters) Is that more a vote FOR Barack Obama or more a vote AGAINST Mitt
Romney? …

BASED ON 476 RESPONDENTS WHO PLAN TO VOTE FOR ROMNEY — SAMPLING ERROR: +/- 4.5 PERCENTAGE PTS.
4. (Asked of Romney voters) Is that more a vote FOR Mitt Romney or more a vote AGAINST Barack
Obama?

Since the combined total of the two exceeds their count of registered voters in the survey (910), we have to assume this refers to the general-population response. That’s wildly different than the 53/41 split that CNN reports from the poll. In fact, it’s only a 48/47 split for Obama. And given that the poll shows a slightly better result for Romney among registered voters, it’s not difficult to conclude that Romney probably led in that category before CNN’s pollster shifted the results around to this extent.

Read the whole thing…it is fascinating to what lengths CNN is going in order to get their boy re-elected.  They refuse to offer the breakdown of respondents the way every other poll does, with number of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents polled.  The comPost and other fishwraps almost always oversample Democrats by double digits over Republicans for their polls, but at least they show their weighted unrealistic numbers.  CNN isn’t going to bother with that.  Plus…they’re even ignoring basic rules of math now!

Nope…no liberal media bias!

Democrats: You know, Hopenchange may doom us in 2012

While Debbie What’s-her-name Schmuck is trying to polish a turd, other Dems are much more realistic than she is.  From Politico:

Obama looms large in every calculus for House control. Buffeted by sinking approval ratings that recently hit sub-40 percent lows, Democrats privately express worry about running on a ticket with his name at the top.

“It didn’t have to be this way,” said another House Democrat who requested anonymity in order to speak candidly. “Obama’s presidency has fizzled. It’s going to be every person for himself in 2012. There just won’t be any coattails, and any effect he does have on the ballot will hurt us.”

“It’s hard because we’re inherently linked to the president and his number,” said a top Democratic operative close to party leadership. “It’s got us all pessimistic.”

Let’s see: B.O. is way upside-down in FL (sucks for Obama’s lap dog, too, in Sen. Bill Nelson).  A Dem poll shows 60 battleground districts all trending Republican, more so than in other elections (including last year’s bloodbath).  ObaMao’s stewardship of the economy has us longing for the Bush economy that supposedly sucked.  So yeah, I’d say that the pessimism is warranted.

Pawlenty out, Perry in, what next?

Bachmann wins Iowa straw poll.  Big deal?  I don’t know.

Ron Paul finishes second in IA.  The Paulestinians will likely crow about this.

Rick Perry formally announces his entry into the 2012 field.

Pawlenty drops out.  He could be a good pick for VP for Perry or Romney, though I doubt the latter would pick him after his “Obamneycare” quip.  Rumor has it that the MN GOP is recruiting him to run for the Senate next year against unaccomplished freshman Amy Klobuchar.

You’d like to think that at 39% approval, B.O. loses to any of these people, despite Debbie Whatshername Schmuck’s absurd assertions to the contrary that he’s in “remarkably good shape“.  Only time will tell.

Right-wing nutjob Senator Durbin (D-IL): This is Obama’s economy

Less than a quarter of all Americans share the views of Uhhhhhhhhhbama.  Nearly half think another Great Depression is upon us, though B.O. himself isn’t sweating even a recession.  Heck, why should he worry, on account of how superwickedawesome his economic policies have worked out for us, right?

And now Durbin the Turban takes time out of his busy day of comparing our soldiers to Pol Pot and Stalin to say this?  Dude.

AP: Obama’s approval rating now at 60%, and his rating on the economy now over 50%! Hmm? Our sampling? Yeah, don’t worry about that.

The AP’s take on their poll:

President Barack Obama’s approval rating has hit its highest point in two years — 60 percent — and more than half of Americans now say he deserves to be re-elected, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll taken after U.S. forces killed al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden.

In worrisome signs for Republicans, the president’s standing improved not just on foreign policy but also on the economy, and independent Americans — a key voting bloc in the November 2012 presidential election — caused the overall uptick in support by sliding back to Obama after fleeing for much of the past two years.

They don’t have a link back to their sampling in the story, so you actually have to go find it elsewhere (PDF link here).  Once you do, though, it becomes pretty clear why the AP was in no mood to put the raw data link directly in the story.  From Ed:

The Dem/Rep/Ind breakdown in this poll is 46/29/4, as AP assigned most of the leaners to the parties.  That is a 17-point gap, more than twice what was seen in the 2008 actual popular vote that elected Obama.  It only gets worse when independents are assigned properly.  When taking out the leaners, the split becomes — I’m not kidding — 35/18/27.  Oh, and another 20% “don’t know.”  That’s significantly worse than the March poll, in which the proper D/R/I was 29/20/34, and far beyond their post-midterm sample of 31/28/26.  It’s pretty easy to get Obama to 60% when Republicans are undersampled by almost half.

Nope…no liberal media bias!

Midterm 2010 postmortem

(Sorry for the delay, but I was wiped yesterday!)

Gloat away, friends!  🙂

Memo to President Oprompter, who now all of a sudden wants to “work together”:  We won.

Drew has a great post on why slaying a RINO in DE turned out to be a bad idea.  It’s not just “hindsight is 20/20”, but I’d say my foresight was pretty friggin’ awesome, too:

Look at how voters identified themselves by ideology…23% liberal, 66% moderate, 17% conservative. Coons cleaned up with liberals and moderates winning those groups 88 and 66 percent respectively. Do you really think those two groups were simply waiting for the ok from Karl Rove and John Cornyn to vote for O’Donnell?
…
Karl Rove and NRSC had nothing to do with O’Donnell’s defeat. In fact, as bad of a candidate as I think O’Donnell is, she had little to do with her defeat. It’s a deeply blue state that actually likes liberals. We had a chance to get a moderate-liberal Republican and passed on it. To me, that was tactically stupid. Yes, Castle would have been a pain in the ass but not as big a one when there were 47 or 48 Republicans in the House. The power of the moderates is when they are all the deciding vote, add a cushion and they are manageable. Personally, I would have like to have had another no vote on HCR in the Senate but others didn’t think that was important enough.

I seemed to recall mentioning that DE was a blue state.  Numerous times.

Rasmussen has always been a great pollster, and remarkably accurate.  But this election cycle, his polls were off.  He overestimated conservative performance in a number of races.  That allowed us to get our hopes up in places like NV and CO, where we thought our candidate was actually going to win.

A bunch of Democrat House bullies got their butts handed to them this week: Alan Grayson in FL, Ciro Rodriguez in TX (here and here), Baron Hill in IN (here), and Bob Etheridge in NC, just to name a few.  Well, Etheridge (the guy who assaulted the college kid with the camera, “Hooer you?”) is losing to Renee Ellmers by 1646 votes, and after “refined” vote totals netted him an additional 453 votes, the “refined” vote total just so happens (conveniently) to now be below 1%, which triggers a recount.  Funny how that happens with Democrats all the time, huh?

Point to ponder: Does Phil Hare (D-IL) care about the Constitution now?  😆

This election showed that with the re-election of Corrine Brown (FL) and Barney Frank (MA), among several others like them, there are indeed some unwinnable seats.  Mike Yost and Sean Bielat were, respectively, great candidates, and they both lost badly.  So let’s please resign ourselves to the reality that there are some seats that will be hopelessly blue in perpetuity.  For conservatives who live in those districts: move.

I wanted Reid’s scalp in the worst way.  But leave it to the Tea Party and Sarah Palin to screw that up for me, as they decided to back the one person in the whole friggin’ state who couldn’t beat Harry Reid 5-to-1.  While the Tea Party did have some success (Rob Portman in OH, Marco Rubio in FL, and Rand Paul in KY, among the notables), they did a horrendous job at vetting and backing other candidates (Buck in CO, Angle in NV, and O’Donnell in DE).  While I love how the Tea Party invigorated American consciousness and ignited conservative turnout, I’d prefer they stay out of the business of endorsing candidates, as their track record is inconsistent.  We would have had CO (Jane Norton), NV (Sue Lowden or Danny Tarkanian), and DE (Mike Castle) had Palin and the TP’ers stayed out of endorsing.  I know many of you may disagree, and that’s cool, but I’m convinced that CO, NV, and DE would have been ours, period.

In his victory speech, Marco Rubio was right: the public didn’t vote for the GOP.  They voted for an obstacle to Obamunism.  The GOP now has a second chance.  Don’t blow it, guys.

Had Charlie Crist taken his GOP primary beating like a man, then warmly endorsed and campaigned for Marco Rubio in the general election, then Crist would have been in a perfect position to destroy Bill Nelson in 2012.  Nelson is as unpopular in FL as Reid is in NV, and unless the GOP produces a quality opponent (and please stay the hell away from FL during our primary in two years, Mrs. Palin!), a bad Nelson will be re-elected just as a bad Reid was.  Crist could have been that guy to derail Nelson.  Instead, his ego and his blind ambition caused him to commit career suicide.  In one year, Crist went from Top Dog to In The Doghouse.

For you “Blue Dogs” who sided with Obama all the time: Now that you’re unemployed, was it worth it?

Russ Feingold lost in WI.  I’m still trying to absorb that.  The same state that voted for Michael Dukakis in 1988 actually voted for a conservative Republican to the U.S. Senate.  Dude.

We didn’t get the Senate this time.  But with a bunch of freshmen and/or red state Dems up for re-election in 2012, and since we’re only about 3-4 away from a majority, the odds are good we’ll prevail in 2012, irrespective of the outcome of the presidential election.

President Kick#ss isn’t convinced that the election was a referendum on him.  Hmmm.  A bunch of Dems representing districts (federal and 680 state) that haven’t been red in decades (and some since Reconstruction) got bounced.  The same districts have been through awful economic times, yet they kept sending back Dems.  But now, these once-blue districts are red.  And it has nothing to do with Obama?  Hey, whatever sweetens your dreams, Champ.

Blogging the midterms tonight (and into the morning)

Updates will be flowing throughout the evening. I’ll probably hit the hay around midnight or so, since those crazy people that sign my paychecks expect me to show up tomorrow and do stuff.  Crazy b#st#rds!  (For those of you on the left, google “paycheck” if the term confuses you.)

UPDATE 7:45 PM EST:  Rand Paul wins KY Senate race over Jack Conway.  Aqua Buddha hardest hit.  Also, Rob Portman wins OH Senate seat vacated by RINO George Voinovich by beating Lee Fisher (D).  Pickup news:  Dan Coats beats liberal Brad Ellsworth for Evan Bayh’s vacated IN Senate seat.  +1 GOP pickup.

UPDATE 8:00PM EST:  The AP is calling the FL Senate race for Marco Rubio!  Most elections, I vote against someone, but with Rubio, I enthusiastically voted for him.  Two man-crushes now: Rubio and Chris Christie (I still like women, though!).  Governor Citrus’ pathetic career comes to a bitter end, though I’m sure Willy Wonka will put him back to work in the chocolate factory.  😆

UPDATE 8:10 PM EST:  The left had hoped to pick up Senate seats in NH and MO (in addition to OH, mentioned above), but it didn’t happen.  Republicans Ayotte in NH and Blunt in MO hold serve.  #sshat Alan Grayson is getting pounded early in FL, which means he’s probably got MSNBC on speed dial and has an itchy dialing finger.

Also, Palin’s gal Christine O’Donnell got creamed by the Bearded Marxist in DE (enjoy Mike Castle’s RINO scalp!).  It didn’t have to be that way, people.

UPDATE 8:30 PM EST:  Blanche Lincoln gets blasted by John Boozman.  Hey, Blanche, how’d that ObamaCare vote work out for you?  You’re welcome, Kevin.  +2 GOP pickup.

UPDATE 8:32 PM EST:  Other “Blue Dogs” have fallen.  Suzanne Kosmas traded her vote on ObamaCare for some NASA pork, but she’s done.  VA’s Tom Perriello won narrowly in a reddish district in ’08, but his Lap Dog votes on ObamaCare, cap and tax, and Porkulus cost him this seat.  His fellow VA Dem Rick Boucher just lost, as did Glenn Nye.

UPDATE 8:35 PM EST:  Congress’ biggest jack#ss Alan Grayson is about to concede to Daniel Webster.  “Submit to me”, Grayson!  😆  Grayson blames Beelzebub the weather and gerrymandering (an R+2 district?)  😆

UPDATE 9:35 PM EST:  Another FL Democrat falls: Allen Boyd in FL-2, in the Panhandle.  Hard to be a “Blue Dog” when you’re adding ObamaCare’s trillions in debt, huh?  Anywho, Barney Frank wins, and we have a Senate pickup in ND, as John Hoeven takes Byron Dorgan’s old seat.  +3 GOP pickup.

UPDATE 10:20 PM EST:  FL governor’s race still up in the air.  Scott (R) up by 4% with about 75% of the votes in (and Democrat-heavy south FL isn’t finished), nowhere near ready to be called.  NM will elect a Republican Latina governor.  Also, the Senate is off the table, but the House is ours, baby!  Chris Matthews’ leg hardest hit.

Olbermann has a hard time finding black people at Tea Party rallies, so perhaps he’ll have an easier time finding Tim Scott, the newly elected black Republican Congressman from SC-1.  He’ll be in the Capitol, douche.

If retired Marine Allen West (no relation to Batman) beats Ron Klein in FL-22, that will be two black Republicans in the House.  If Ryan Frazier comes from behind to win in CO-7, that would be three black Republicans.  If those two men lose, can we ask why Democrats hate black people?  😉

UPDATE 10:40 PM EST:  McCain’s buddy Russ Feingold (D-WI) falls to businessman Ron Johnson.  +4 GOP pickup.

Also, SC elects Palin’s gal Nikki Haley as governor.  Haley endured mudslinging, especially unfounded rumors of an affair (and if you saw the dude who accused her of sleeping with him, you’d know it was a lie, as the guy was uglier than Helen Thomas chasing a parked car…and catching it.)

Stupak mortgaged his career for ObamaCare, and his seat just went to Republican Dan Banishek.

UPDATE 11:00 PM EST: Remember this guy?  Phil Hare (D-IL), who said he didn’t care about the Constitution and that the deficit was a “myth”?  Yeah, well now his career his a myth, as he just fell.

Still waiting on FL governor.  83% in, Scott up by 3% with South FL coming in.

UPDATE 11:40 PM EST: AP calls it for Pat Toomey. +5 GOP pickup.

UPDATE 11:59 PM EST: FL governor’s race still not decided.  91% of the votes in, Scott up by 2%, not done yet.

AP calls IL Senate for Mark Kirk.  Obama’s old seat, in Republican hands! +6 GOP pickup. 

Allen West did defeat Ron Klein in FL-22.  Predicted MSM headline:  Two black Republicans going to Congress, blacks hardest hit.

Votes out west being counted, but Californiastan votes for that senile relic Jerry Brown for governor, as well as Senator Ma’am, thus proving that they have no interest in resolving their economic despair anytime soon.  Don’t know any more, I’m off to bed.

UPDATE 09:39 AM EST: FL governor’s race still not decided. 99% of the precincts are in, with Republican Rick Scott clinging to a 1% 53,000 vote lead, and about 66 precincts in heavily Democrat Palm Beach County remaining. If Scott’s lead holds and stays above 27,000, he avoids the state-mandated automatic recount. However, since Sink is married to ambulance chaser Bill McBride (recipient of Jeb Bush’s buttkicking in 2002), I wouldn’t be shocked if her side sues in the event of a loss.

UPDATE 10:49 AM EST: The FL governor’s race appears to be over.  Alex Sink just conceded to Republican Rick Scott.  It was very close, but in the end, the votes just weren’t there.  And while that inconvenience doesn’t always stop Dems from finding/creating more, I guess Sink concluded that Scott’s win was outside the margin of fraud.

Also, don’t look now, but the nepot from AK (Princess Murkowski) looks like she just might pull off her write-in bid to get back to DC.  Absentee ballots and overseas ballots have to be counted, and they did swing the 2008 Senate election to Democrat Mark Begich, so anything’s possible, I guess.  But it’s not looking good for Republican Joe Miller.

Study: Democrats can’t run on achievements, so they run on negative ads

Don’t get me wrong here, folks.  I have no problem with negative ads, so long as they’re honest.  This is a bit desperate, though:

In one typical example, Democratic ads have transformed Kentucky Republican House candidate Andy Barr into “a convicted criminal” — complete with images yellow police tape and fuzzy video of crime scenes. Not mentioned is his crime: As a college student 19 years ago, he was caught using a fake ID during spring break.

If only he had commited perjury or obstructed justice instead of the significantly more heinous crime of trying to get booze as an immature college kid, right?  And if he had snorted some coke, he could actually be president today!

What’s hilarious here is that since the Dems can’t give anybody a reason to vote for them, they’re relegated to trying to convince voters to vote against the other guy.  It’s a trend:

As you watch this year’s ads — and I’ve been watching all too many lately — you’ll notice a striking difference between Democratic and Republican attack ads: Democrats are attacking over personal issues, Republicans are attacking over policy.

There are, of course, many exceptions, but the overall trend is clear. Democrats are hitting their Republican opponents over past legal transgressions, shady business deals and even speeding tickets. Republicans are hammering Democrats over “Obamacare,” Nancy Pelosi and the economy.

A recent study by the Wesleyan Media Project actually quantifies this. They looked at 900,000 airing of political ads this year and concluded: “Democrats are using personal attacks at much higher rates than Republicans and a much higher rate than Democrats in 2008.”

CLICK HERE for the study summary.

Go to the next page for some — and there are many more — of the personal attack ads being run by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. 

Ask Jack Conway in KY, author of the infamous “Aqua Buddha” ad, how that attack worked out for him.  With about four days to go, the consensus thus far?  Not very effective, and in all likelihood, counterproductive.

Poll sounds the death knell on Crist’s ill-fated Senate campaign?

From Rasmussen:

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Voters in Florida shows Rubio with 50% of the vote, up nine points from just over a week ago and his best showing in the race to date. Support for Crist, the state’s current GOP governor, has fallen to a new low of 25%, while Meek captures 19%. Three percent (3%) like another candidate in the race, and three percent (3%) more are undecided.

That’s 50%, in a three-way race.  While there are still three weeks until Election Day, and as such there is always time for an unforeseen error or scandal, this race is Rubio’s to lose.

In honor of the nation’s first Oompa Loompa governor, and with the proper recognition to Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, I give you the following:

Oompa Loompa, doopity doo,
I’ve got another puzzle for you.
Oompa Loompa, doopity dee,
Crist said Rubio “drinks too much tea!”

What do you get when a RINO is toast?
A seat that was his for the taking, he boasts.
Feeling he was due, he had waited “his turn”,
but just like his skin, his cam..paign…burned!

You would be Charlie Crist!

Oompa Loompa, doopity dah,
Charlie Suntan’s on his last hurrah.
No one knows what Charlie will do,
When the Oompa Loompa’s career is through!

Note to commenter Kanaka Girl:  You’re welcome!  😆

Gallup: Hey, things are looking up for Democrats! Rasmussen: Um, no, they’re not!

Gallup’s generic Congressional ballot result has to be seen to be believed: Jackass Party + 1.

Rasmussen: GOP +10.

For those who have been following Gallup’s trend lately, this shouldn’t be unexpected.  They will release a poll showing Dems up, then the next one will show them not just down but waaaaay down.  Repeat as necessary.

I just had a flashback to Animal House.  Gallup is channeling Chip Diller:

Obama a liability…in Illinois…says DEMOCRAT pollster?

No way!

Way.

Illinois voters say they would be negatively influenced if a candidate was endorsed by Barack Obama. And if his support isn’t an asset in his home state it’s hard to imagine where it is.  (Martha’s Vineyard, maybe? CL)

40% of voters in the state say they’d be less likely to support an Obama endorsed candidate to only 26% who say it would be an asset. The reality at this point is that Obama turns Republican voters off to a much greater extent than he excites Democrats. That’s reflected in the fact that 83% of Republicans say an Obama endorsement would be a negative with them while only 49% of Democrats say it would be a positive. Independents also respond negatively by a 38/19 margin.

The numbers on an Obama endorsement are perhaps more relevant with undecided voters. Among those who have not yet made up their minds in the Senate race 21% say an Obama endorsement would resonate positively with them while 33% say it would be a turnoff.

Hopenchange…catch the wave!  😆

Ouch! More people now blame Obama for lousy economy than Bush

It’s Bush’s fault that…um…it’s no longer Bush’s fault.  Or something.  Anywho:

Forty-eight percent of voters now believe that President Obama’s policies are to blame for the bad economy, while 47 percent fault former President George W. Bush.

According to a new Rasmussen survey, Obama’s 48 percent represents a three-point increase since last month, giving him a greater share of the blame than Bush for the first time since May 2009, when the question was first polled.

By the way, USA Today’s poll shows that President Kick#ss has a 41% approval rating.  The hilarity?  USA Today buried this number down in paragraph five, after talking about Afghanistan, Iraq, and the economy.  It’s like “Obama sucks at Afghanistan.  He sucks at Iraq.  He sucks at the economy.  In other news, Obama sucks, period.”  When you have to bury the results of your own poll in your own fishwrap, you know things aren’t looking good for B.O.  But no, no media bias or anything.

Pelosi’s strategy to retain the House: Hey, let’s run on the super awesome and mega-popular ObamaCare!

From The Hill:

Speaker Nancy Pelosi is doubling down on healthcare reform, betting that it will do Democrats more good than harm in November’s elections.

She and her leadership team have seized on new polls that suggest healthcare overhaul’s popularity is rising, and they are urging members of Congress to use this week’s recess to tout the new law.

Pelosi (D-Calif.) and the party leadership have sent lawmakers back to their districts urging them to hold town hall-type meetings to highlight the law’s benefits, in the belief it could help Democrats avoid major losses in November.

Recent polls indicate a slow but steady uptick in the popularity of healthcare reform. (Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? – Ed.) Despite Republican hopes that the law’s controversial passage will win them seats this fall, the Democrats’ actions show they still consider the issue a political winner.

If, by “a slow but steady uptick in the popularity of healthcare reform”, they mean “60% of voters favor repeal of ObamaCare”, then yeah…”a slow but steady uptick.”

I mean, we’ve seen over the last several days and weeks stories that (a) businesses are going to drop health care coverage for their employees because paying the fine is cheaper for them; (b) doctors are going to stop taking new Medicare and Medicaid patients, which will swell the size of emergency rooms; (c) taxes on medical supply companies are going up, which will be passed on to consumers; (d) high risk patients not being picked up in the new high risk pool; etc., etc., etc.  So yeah, why wouldn’t there be an “uptick in the popularity of health care reform”?

Good luck with that strategy in swing districts, San Fran Nan.

Anti-incumbent year? Sure…if you’re a Democrat incumbent!

The talking points from the left are that there is an anti-incumbent sentiment, not an anti-Democrat or anti-Obama/Pelosi/Reid sentiment, that is making November shape up to be a rough one for Dems.  While there is a small morsel of truth in that statement (see Bob Bennett’s defeat in the UT GOP Senate primary), by and large, it’s a crock.  The sentiment is definitely, without a doubt, largely anti-Democrat.  Poll after poll shows massive unpopularity with the Dems, especially among independents.

This, though, is particularly damning:

To gauge what voters are thinking in House districts where surveys show the races will likely be tight in November and a switch in party control is possible, Democratic firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research and Republican firm Public Opinion Strategies conducted a poll of 1,200 “likely” voters in 60 battleground districts that elected Democrats in 2008 (one of the seats is vacant) and 10 districts now represented by Republicans. The full poll, including the list of battleground districts, is here.

There’s more at the link.

So much for the “it’s not the left’s agenda, it’s just the state of the economy, etc.” meme.

Heh: Dem poll shows more Louisianans approved of Bush’s handling of Katrina than Obama’s handling of oil spill!

Ouch!

Our new Louisiana poll has a lot of data points to show how unhappy voters in the state are with Barack Obama’s handling of the oil spill but one perhaps sums it up better than anything else- a majority of voters there think George W. Bush did a better job with Katrina than Obama’s done dealing with the spill.

50% of voters in the state, even including 31% of Democrats, give Bush higher marks on that question compared to 35% who pick Obama.

Overall only 32% of Louisianans approve of how Obama has handled the spill to 62% who disapprove. 34% of those polled say they approved of how Bush dealt with Katrina to 58% who disapproved.

Exit question: Will President Kick#ss’s speech change this perception?

Poll: 63% favor repeal of ObamaCare

The news just keeps getting worse for B.O., n’est-ce pas?  From Rasmussen:

Support for repeal of the new national health care plan has jumped to its highest level ever. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 63% of U.S. voters now favor repeal of the plan passed by congressional Democrats and signed into law by President Obama in March.

Prior to today, weekly polling had shown support for repeal ranging from 54% to 58%.

Currently, just 32% oppose repeal.

The new findings include 46% who Strongly Favor repeal of the health care bill and 25% who Strongly Oppose it.

While opposition to the bill has remained as consistent since its passage as it was beforehand, this marks the first time that support for repeal has climbed into the 60s. It will be interesting to see whether this marks a brief bounce or indicates a trend of growing opposition.

Thirty-three percent (33%) of voters now believe the health care plan will be good for the country, down six points from a week ago and the lowest level of confidence in the plan to date. Fifty-five percent (55%) say it will be bad for the nation. Only three percent (3%) think it will have no impact.

This part doesn’t bode well for the Socialist-in-Chief and his Marxist minions in Congress:

Not only has support grown for repeal overall, it has also grown broadly in the electorate.  Majorities of both men (65%) and women (62%) want ObamaCare repealed.  Majorities in every age demographic want it repealed as well, including a shocking 70% of 18-29YO voters, which normally form the base of Barack Obama’s age-demographic support.  That includes a 47% plurality that strongly supports repeal, suggesting that younger voters have finally realized that ObamaCare uses them to subsidize insurance premiums of older Americans.

In other demographics, the news is equally bad.  Only the lowest income earners don’t want repeal, and that’s just by eight points, 40/48.  Solid majorities support repeal in every other income bracket, and “strongly supports” doesn’t get below 48% in any of them.  Seventy-two percent of independents want it repealed, and even 36% of Democrats support repeal — 17% of them strongly.

As Sarah Palin said: “I can see November from my house!” (S##k it, Tina Fey.)

Specter goes down in PA primary

Benedict Arlen switched from the GOP to the Democrap Party last year, saying then that due to abysmal polling numbers against Pat Toomey in the GOP primary, he was not willing to subject himself to the Republican electorate.  He switched, thinking that (a) he would run unopposed in the Dem primary and (b) he could expect a boost from Obama.  Neither happened.  Sphincter fell to Joe Sestak last night, 54%-46%.  Yet another loss by a BO-endorsed candidate.

This, my friends, is a double-edged sword.  On the one hand, it is highly satisfying to see an opportunist amoral career politician like Specter go down in flames in a primary, an undignified way to go.  On the other hand, it’s likely that Sestak will poll better than Specter would have in November.  Yes, current polls show Toomey beating Sestak, but there’s a lot of time between now and November.  Plus, PA has a bad habit of voting Dem when push comes to shove.  Chances are that Toomey would have killed Specter, but I believe Sestak will prove to be tougher competition.  Time will tell.

If Toomey does lose in November, the silver lining is that Snarlin’ Arlen has finally been put out to pasture and out of our misery.

Crist’s indy bounce disappears

FL Governor Charlie Crist once swore that he would not bolt the GOP, even if he lost the Senate nomination to Republican Marco Rubio.  He flip-flopped.

Crist said he would issue a partial refund of donor money.  He flip-flopped, giggling about it like Michael Moore at a Golden Corral grand opening.  Details (video at link):

The standout moment came when a heckler started shouting at Crist (around 3:10 into clip), “What about the guys who gave you money when you were a Republican?!”

“I’m going to keep it!” Crist cheerfully responded, drawing roars of approval. Check out his wink right after.

Well, you may plan on keeping the money, Governor Ooompa Loompa, but you can forget about keeping your indy-switching momentum.  From Rasmussen:

Charlie Crist received a bounce in the polls when he left the Republican Party to run for the U.S. Senate as an independent. New numbers suggest that the bounce for the governor is over.

A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely voters in Florida finds Republican Marco Rubio with 39% support, while Crist earns 31% of the vote and Democrat Kendrick Meek trails at 18%. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided.

Two weeks ago, just after Crist announced that he was running as an independent, he held a 38% to 34% advantage over Rubio.

All the political experts were saying all along that the numbers were simply not sustainable.  There was no way Crist was going to take a third of Republicans and a third of Democrats while running as an indy.  This latest poll bears that out.

Charlie, you flubbed up, dude.  You picked a bad year to be a crass, brazen political opportunist.  This year, the electorate is rebelling against your kind: self-serving, me-first, finger-in-the-wind, unprincipled career politicians.  Arlen Specter gambled, and he looks like he’s toast.  You’re next, pal.  Maybe you can get another hug from B.O., only this time, it’ll be a consolation hug.

AP poll takes a little snooze from reality

Rasmussen has B.O.’s overall approval rating at a pitiful 43%.  The pollster shows that the number of people who strongly support B.O. is at 22%, while the number who strongly oppose his policies are nearly doubled, 43%.

Every poll has B.O. under 50%.  So what does the state-run AP do?  Why, commission a poll showing B.O.’s approval “holding fairly steady” at 53%, naturally!  Ed notices a slight sampling problem, though:

An asset for his rank and file?  Hardly.  The AP only reaches that conclusion by surveying adults rather than registered or likely voters, which are polls more suited to predicting outcomes for elections.  The AP knows this, but apparently couldn’t be bothered to adjust its polling technique to more accurately predict electoral behavior — or wanted to put its finger on the scale without too many people discovering its game.

The partisan gap in this sample is another big reason.  While poll after poll shows that gap nearly disappearing, the AP sample has a whopping 11-point advantage for Democrats, 45/34, including independent leaners (page 31).  Without the leaners, it’s 33/23.  Bear in mind that Obama got elected in November 2008 with a seven-point advantage in the popular vote — and that was with significant Republican crossover voting.   The AP’s partisan split at that time was 48/34, 40/24 without leaners.

Nope…no liberal media bias!

Crist down by 32 to Rubio in today’s poll

Charlie Crist is going down faster than Ted Kennedy’s car at Chappaquiddick.  Details:

Rubio now leads Crist 60-28, including a staggering 71-17 lead with conservatives. Crist has a 49-36 advantage with party moderates, but they account for just 31% of likely primary voters compared to 65% who describe themselves as conservative.

Rubio is benefiting from a widely held sentiment among Florida GOP voters that Congressional Republicans are too liberal and that Crist would add to the problem. 41% of them think that the party leadership in Washington is too liberal, and with those folks Rubio holds an 83-10 lead. 50% think that Crist himself is too liberal and with those voters Rubio’s advantage expands even wider to 90-5.

It also looks like it’s too late for Crist to audible and make another run for Governor. GOP voters say they’d prefer likely nominee Bill McCollum over Crist by a 49-35 margin. In fact Republicans generally just want Crist to go away– 56% say they’d like him out of office a year from now to 19% who’d like to see him continue as Governor and only 14% who want him in the Senate.

Hard to believe that a guy with such big national aspirations is now a massive failure at the state level within his own party.  It wouldn’t surprise me if he were to pull a Specter and switch to the Dem side, or pull a Jeffords and switch to the Dem…er, “independent” side.  Not that it will make a difference one way or the other.

Poll: Americans less respected in the world today than under the evil fiend Bush

The poll was conducted by two liberal groups, too.  Although the results show that America’s standing in the world has been severely tarnished over the last 14 months, you have to wonder if liberals consider that to be a bug or a feature.

I’m stunned, though.  I mean, who knew that a global apology/groveling tour by B.O., trying to close Gitmo, wanting to meet with genocidal dictators without preconditions, wanting to give civilian trials to bloodthirsty camelhumping jihadists, and trying to remove “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” from our military would give the world the impression that our president is a puss?

Obama’s “reverse Midas touch”

Oprompter’s popularity is in the toilet.

So is that of his foot-in-mouth friend Harry Reid.

So is that of his party in Congress, who now stand to lose the House and possibly Senate.

His buds who ran for governor in VA and NJ, as well as the Senate in MA, all lost.

ACORN?  Exposed, and cracking up.

The next victim of being an F.O.B. (Friend of Barack)?  Unions.  Details:

Favorable views of labor unions have plummeted since 2007, amid growing public skepticism about unions’ purpose and power. Currently, 41% say they have a favorable opinion of labor unions while about as many (42%) express an unfavorable opinion. In January 2007, a clear majority (58%) had a favorable view of unions while just 31% had an unfavorable impression.

Bad things happen to people who latch onto President Training Wheels.  Amazingly enough, he still draws friends and followers like a cliff draws lemmings…and with a remarkably similar outcome.

Rubio goes RINO hunting, has CPAC momentum behind him

Latest poll in the FL Senate Republican primary: Marco Rubio 54%, Charlie Crist 36%.

It seems that hugging Obama, embracing the stimulus, and Hispandering to illegal immigrants hasn’t endeared Crist to the GOP base.  Who knew?

By the way, Marco Rubio brought the house down at the CPAC shindig last week.  The base loves him.  I would caution anyone to get too enamoured with a politician, lest they wind up like the Obamatons where they toss sense out the window.

Be that as it may, Rubio looks like a wonderful alternative to Crist thus far, and polls show that either one of them would handily defeat Obama handmaiden Rep. Kendrick Meek in the general election.

Evan Bayh (D-IN) to not seek re-election

This was a seat that, until about 2 – 3 weeks ago, Dems didn’t worry about having to defend this year.  Then, former Senator Dan Coats announced he would seek his old seat back, recognizing that Bayh had sold out Indiana to the national Democrats.  All of a sudden, the seat was imperiled.

In totally unrelated news, Bayh has decided not to seek re-election.  Details:

Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh will not seek re-election this year, he announce Monday, a decision that hands Republicans a prime pickup opportunity in the middle of the country.

“After all these years, my passion for service to my fellow citizens is undiminished, but my desire to do so by serving in Congress has waned,” Bayh said at a press conference in Indianapolis.

…

“My decision was not motivated by political concern,” Bayh said. “Even in the current challenging environment, I am confident in my prospects for re-election.”

Uh-huh.  His decision to support ObamaCare, which is massively unpopular back home in Indiana, cost him major points and put a huge dent in his “moderate/centrist” facade.  Coats announcing that he would challenge lap dog…er, “Blue Dog…Bayh had jack squat to do with Bayh’s decision not to run, huh?  Sorry…not buying it.  Count this as a near-lock for a GOP pickup.

Bayh-bayh!

Democrats: Rasmussen’s poll, and not our socialist agenda, is why we’re losing right now

Way to shoot the messenger, guys.  But hey, if that’s what makes you feel better about the impending whitewash you’re gonna get at the polls this year, then so be it.  Excerpt:

Democrats are turning their fire on Scott Rasmussen, the prolific independent pollster whose surveys on elections, President Obama’s popularity and a host of other issues are surfacing in the media with increasing frequency.

The pointed attacks reflect a hardening conventional wisdom among prominent liberal bloggers and many Democrats that Rasmussen Reports polls are, at best, the result of a flawed polling model and, at worst, designed to undermine Democratic politicians and the party’s national agenda. …

While Scott Rasmussen, the firm’s president, contends that he has no ax to grind — his bio notes that he has been “an independent pollster for more than a decade” and “has never been a campaign pollster or consultant for candidates seeking office” — his opponents on the left insist he is the hand that feeds conservative talkers a daily trove of negative numbers that provides grist for attacks on Obama and the Democratic Party.

Don Quixote just called to say what a stupid idea this is.

Considering how accurate Rasmussen’s polls turn out to be when election time rolls around, and considering that the MSM’s polls oversample Democrats by double-digits and even those polls show the Dems’ support plunging, I can certainly understand why the left is worried.  However, their ire is a tad bit “misdirected”, to say the very least.

Exit question: Considering how well the White House’s war on Fox News went (and by “well”, I mean “horribly badly”), why does the Democrat Party really want to go down this road?

“Notoriously skewed to the left” polls at Gallup finally catch up with normal polls and show Obama underwater

When the pollsters at CNN/Gallup have their leftwards-tilting polls that routinely oversample Democrats showing President B+ just under 50%, it’s a pretty safe bet that he’s well under 50%.  Like, say, 44%.

Yep…a solid B+, huh?  😆

2009 election results

I was 2-of-3 in my predictions yesterday.  I got VA and NY-23 correct, but I got NJ wrong.  I’m thrilled that the people of NJ decided to stop their insanity (continuously electing Democrats while their economy tanked and taxes skyrocketed) and try something different.

The left and right will spin these results to their liking, but here’s my takeaway for the evening:

VA:  This is still a center-right state.  Dems win in VA by pretending not to be liberal.  All Creigh Deeds had to run with last night was “Don’t vote for McDonnell, because he wrote something I find objectionable when he was in college!”  Oddly enough, no one in the MSM seemed that concerned about what Barry or Shelly O wrote in college, but I digress.  The fact is that B.O. just isn’t that popular in VA these days.  That may explain why he stayed away from the campaign trail there.

NJ:  This is still a deep blue state.  Granted, the governor-elect Chris Christie didn’t have to pretend to be a moderate or a RINO to win, as he ran on conservative principles.  But with taxes so ludicrously high and the economy there in dire straits, the people of NJ didn’t trust or like Jon Corzine.  Corzine even called in B.O. to run his campaign, and it didn’t work.  (Sidebar: Some on the left say that Deeds lost VA because, in part, he didn’t embrace Uhhhhh-bama.  That dog won’t hunt, because Corzine did embrace B.O., and he still lost by about 4%…in a dark blue state.)  Christie will have to contend with a predominantly Democrat legislature, but let them go on record opposing tax cuts and tax reform.

NY-23:  Michelle Malkin has a great summary at her blog that best reflects my view.  Sure, it would have been awesome for Hoffman to win.  And it looks like Scuzzieblahblah’s defection tilted the election to the Democrat Bill Owens.  However, hopefully the GOP learned a valuable lesson here: instead of allowing a bunch of senile old dudes to pick the party’s nominee in a pizzeria and then pumping a cool mill into the leftist’s campaign, how’s about allowing a primary and then stay the heck out while the people of that district pick their winner (see FL in Senate 2010 race)!  It is highly unlikely that Scuzzie would have gotten a second look in the district were she on a primary ballot, and her endorsement would have instead had two effects: jack and squat.  We accept RINOs where we know that we absolutely MUST (see the Maine sisters in the Senate), but we won’t accept pro-abortion, pro-ACORN, pro-gay marriage, pro-union “Republicans” in cherry red districts.

Anywho, does this 2-of-3 Republican evening spell doom for the Dems next year?  Hard to say, since 12 months is a political eternity.  However, it certainly means that taking a snapshot of today, things are not looking good for them at all.