nevada

Arkansas:

I must say I am very dissappointed that Blanche Lincloln survived her primary challenge by Bill Halter in Arkansas.  Labor unions and national progressives like myself wanted to send a message to corporatist Democrats that we are not going to support Republican-lite candidates like Lincoln.  That being said, neither candidate had much of a chance to beat the Republican challenger John Boozman because of the slow economic recovery and right wing leaning trend of the state of Arkansas.

Frankly, I'm not sure yet where I come down on the Arkansas general election.  I definitely won't be sending any money to Lincoln the way I did for Halter.  And I'm not even sure I would bother showing up to vote for her in November if I were a resident?  Is it better for progressives and labor supporters to just stay home and let the Republican have the seat for six years or do we hold our noses and vote for someone who will stab us in the back every time one of her corporate donors says jump?

Also, I'd like to know if Halter is going to challenge the sleazy election rigging that happened at the last minute.  Apparently, in one of Halter's strongholds, Garland county, only 2 of 40 polling places were opened for this runoff.  Keeping most of the polling places closed forced Halter supporters to have to drive much much further and wait for hours in 90+ degree heat.  Basically Halter got "Bubba'd".  It'll be interesting to see what happens there.

Nevada:

I'm kind of sorry that the Sue the-chicken-lady Lowden lost.  That "chickens for checkups" healthcare plan of hers was absolutely hilarious!  The wingnuts in the Nevada state legislature even had to pass a law that people in chicken costumes where not allowed near the polling areas.  Anyway, the teabagger candidate - Sharron Angle, seems to be even nuttier and probably easier to beat for Harry Reid.

Supposedly Angle is either a Scientologist or at least guilty of helping to pass legislation that introduced Scientology programs into Nevada prisons at the taxpayers expense.  Personally I think all religion is absurd, but Scientology is especially bizarre.  Although Mormonism isn't too far behind.

If Angle's Scientology kookiness isn't enough for you Angle has also spoken out strongly against fluoride, the substance known alternately for improving dental health and as a Communist plot to undermine Western democracy.  Seriously, where do the teabaggers get these people?  Some of the other bizarre positions Angle holds are that she supports bringing back prohibition and that doctors need to inform patients that abortion causes breast cancer.  Anyway, it should be fun to watch the Reid campaign eviscerate this wackaloon.

Lastly, the incumbent governor Jim Gibbons lost his primary bid.  This is too bad for the Dems because he would've been fairly easy to defeat.   He had a tabloid personal life, an endless stream of gaffes and questionable appointments, and a lack of engagement even as the economic crisis worsened.

California:

Overall, I think progressives did the best in California.  Meg Whitman had to spend $80 million of her own money to win her primary and says she is willing to spend another $125 million for the priveledge of losing to Jerry Brown in the general for governor.  And the disastrous former CEO of HP, Carly "Carlyfornia" Fiorina, also dipped into her personal fortune (i.e. golden parachute) for the right to square off against Barbara Boxer in the Senate race.  Apparently, Republicans think whoever has the most money, is also the most qualified.

Senator John Kyle told a reporter this, when asked what they were doing about the health care debacle. “We are offering amendments to make it a better bill.” WHAT?!! This is what we are getting for leadership out of our Senators?

They haven’t figured out, after all the fuss, that the American people don’t want any part of this bill? Do we have to dump the entire leadership and start over? What do they not understand about ‘just say no’? We didn’t ask them to repair the darn thing. We asked them to reject the redistribution of 1/6 of the nation’s economy entirely. Scrap it and start over using free market principles and tort reform for starters.

John McCain has so far been one of the most cogent and vocal proponents of scrapping the legislation and starting over. I certainly have my differences with Senator McCain, but he has been a stalwart on this one.

Our favorite RINOs in the meantime, Republican Senators OLYMPIA SNOWE and SUSAN COLLINS, are playing ‘ring around the rosie’ and may get dropped like the plague if they vote for this thing. They need another reminder of just who it is they work for. Snowe was called up to the White House to cozy up to His Anointedness over the weekend…one wonders what the price tag of her treachery will turn out to be.

We know that the bribe of largesse to Blanche Lincoln was THREE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS to sell out her constituents. By the way, she is significantly behind her challengers in the upcoming election polling. Arkansans are 56% against the health care bill as opposed to a mere 18% who approve of the legislation. More attention needs to be paid to BLANCHE LINCOLN this week as well. We need to hammer the message home in no too uncertain terms exactly what we expect and what we will do if they vote yes.

The ever popular Dingy Harry Reid is a full TEN POINTS DOWN IN HIS OWN STATE! This, after he put on a SIX WEEK media blitz trying to sell his bait and switch to the people of Nevada, who are almost universally against the health care takeover.

It seems the American people have and are doing their part in spades. It’s time the Republican leadership does theirs. We expect them to fight this bill…every WORD, COMMA AND PERIOD. And what’s more, we expect them to win!

Semper Vigilans, Semper Fidelis

© Skip MacLure 2009

I don't know much about Danny Tarkanian other than the fact that his dad coached some exciting basketball teams, but if the rest of his campaign is as funny and on target as this ad, then Harry Reid in a world of trouble:

There's a must read over @ the New Ledger which I think makes a point missed by the Beltway brain trust.

Yet the assumption that these protesters are right-wingers — or as others have accused, fake grassroot anger, or “astroturf” — seems a vast oversimplification. While we hardly have data on the people who have been attending these townhalls and shouting down members attempting to sell health care insurance reform, anecdotal evidence indicates that this is hardly manufactured dissent. Obama’s plan is hardly popular, and many Americans who are not Republican or conservative are opposed to the package and nervous about its outcome.

Domenech makes the point that this appears much more to be a sudden resurgence of the Ross Perot phenomena than any Republican party inspired movement. I tend to agree. Recent polls show that Republican party identification is still rather low; it's been deterioration in Democratic support over recent months that's kept the gap from widening. To the extent any national figures have stoked the flames, they are media hosts like Limbaugh, Hannity , Beck and Levin and not Republican elected officials.  And the "feel" of the crowds doesn't reflect the losing late decade Republican coalition of preachers and lobbyists.

These protesters aren’t really fans of either party (George W. Bush is no more popular at Tea Parties than Barack Obama), but driven by a strong sense — and basic American ideas of liberty — that the government shouldn’t be intruding on their lives, taking their money and giving it to companies that don’t deserve it, telling them which doctor to go to, and generally mismanaging things.

Indeed, the only contemporary Republican political figure who seems to be aligned with this inchoate anti-establishment vibe is Sarah Palin, who as we are well aware marches to her own drummer.  While Palin is often pigeonholed by the MSM as a 'social conservative champion", much of the energy she brought to the McCain campaign during its brief burst of success was appealing to these sorts of voters who had tuned out the Republican establishment.

These voters are "middle American radicals"--distrustful of big government but usually skeptical of movement conservatism or corporate Republicanism.  I suspect that one will find a rather substantial number sat out the 2008 election, and clearly they decided to abstain from the 2006 midterms in droves, costing us both houses of Congress. 

So here's the challenge:

if those on the right aren’t able to present a strong, coherent alternative, they will be unable to rally these Perotistas to their side. In 1994, the Republicans were successful at this, combining a package of populist governmental reforms with outrage against irresponsible governance to attain victory — but more recently, they’ve given no signs of having this capability. Whether they can recapture it, and claim enough of the independent middle to win, will be a very challenging thing indeed.

And what are Republicans doing to harness this energy for the 2010 elections?  Nominating a bunch of "certified pre-owned candidates"

The latest example is from Colorado, where it appears failed 2006 gubernatorial candidate Bob Beauprez is about to challenge appointed Democratic senator Bennet. 

Beauprez appears to be a perfectly satisfactory guy; he won a swing House district twice and seems to have done a credible job in Congress.  But how much pizazz are we getting running a guy whose been around awhile and lost his last statewide race by double digits?  Maybe the alternatives haven't shown to be able to get it done, but I'd like to think we'd do better than a "round up the usual suspects" approach to nominating candidates in this unconventional election cycle  

Same for Roy Blunt or Charlie Crist. Are we giving ourselves our best shot in 2010 by running old time corporate Republicans? And let's assume they do win. Are these the sorts of people that are going to inspire a new generation to become active Republicans?

Lemme throw a race where we should be thinking outside the box. Nevada. Harry Reid has anemic approval numbers but all the prominent Republican officeholders of late have legal problems or think they'll wait for John Ensign to step aside in 2012.

Fine. Why don't we look to a nonpolitician to run against Reid. Make this the classic outsider vs. the classic insider.

Half of Nevada's voters weren't around when Reid got into the Senate. Nevada is a state built on gambling, this seems like a good bet to me.

Or will we find the last political warhorse who lost a statewide race or hold some obscure legislative post and hand the keys off to him?

Stop looking for old jalopies. The Republican party is not going to thrive in the future running its own version of "cash for clunkers". Time for the bright new models!  

Michael Barone makes a typically brilliant point looking forward to 2010:

[I]f I were a conservative cheerleader against the Obama/Pelosi stimulus package, I would be concentrating less of my fire against the three Republicans who supported the Senate version and more on Democratic members of the House and (at least those who are up for reelection in 2010) the Senate.

Given all the talk on the right the past few days, I must go on the record AGAINST a primary challenge to Arlen Specter.  My reason is simple: Arlen Specter is the only Republican who's won Statewide in Pennsylvania at the Federal Level since 2001.  More specifically, he knows how to win in the Philly suburbs.  As Chris Palko has blogged about on this site, Republicans have gotten killed in the Philly 'burbs for the past decade.

A little background: I supported Pat Toomey in 2004.  In 2004, Republicans had a (reasonably) popular President, control of the U.S. House, and VERY narrow control of the U.S. Senate; under those circumstances, it made sense to replace a Liberal Republican with a Conservative Republican.  There was good reason to believe that whoever won the Republican Primary would cruise to victory in the General Election.  As a state with a Democrat Governor and a Republican State Senate, Pennsylvanians are well known ticket splitters.

In 2010, Republicans will only have 41 Senators.  While the President's popularity heading into the election cannot be known, Conservatives should prepare for the worst.  Republicans shouldn't risk a perfectly good Senate seat when a much smarter alternative exists.  Whatever Specter's flaws, a liberal Republican is better than a Democrat.

And what, pray tell, is the Alternative?

That one's simple.

Let's Beat Democrats!

More Specifically, there are 5 (actually 10) Senate seats currently held by DEMOCRATS that we should aggressively target before we counterproductively cannibalize our own.

1) Indiana - While Obama eeked out McCain in this state in 2008, it's historically been a GOP stronghold.  As such, Indiana will be Ground Zero of any backlash against President Obama's economic policies; Evan Bayh will not be able to hide his vote(s) .  If Mike Pence runs for the Seat, so much the better.

2) Wisconsin - While Obama won this state solidly in 2008, it has a history of electing Republicans and Bush almost won it in 2004.  The Incumbent, Russ Feingold, is a far left kook who teamed up with John McCain for one of the all time great legislative assaults on the Constitution.  If Congressman Paul Ryan or Former Governor Thompson could pick up this seat, they would do the nation a great service.

3) North Dakota - This is a state that consistently votes Republican at the Presidential and Gubenatorial Levels yet elects borderline Bolsheviks to the U.S. Senate.  Well, the Radicals Have Taken Over and they just got their way on economic policy.  Byron Dorgan will own the results of President Obama's economic policy.  Most of the statewide offices (at the state level) are held by Republicans.

4) Arkansas -  This state was one of the few bright spots for the GOP in 2008.  Every county voted more Republican than 2004.  Seats like these are the low hanging fruit of any future majority.

5) Nevada - President Obama just insulted Las Vegas.  Harry Reid is President Obama's cheif Lieutenant in the Senate.  Need I say more?

As you can see, pickup opportunities abound in seats currently held by Democrats.  We can do more to influence the agenda in the Senate by picking up these seats than by going after one of our own.  Primary Challenges are a luxury we cannot afford.

---

In case you would like to know why Arlen Specter deserves to stay in the Senate, I present the following three reasons:

1) The Surge -- In 2007, when the Democrats in Congress wanted to give up in Iraq, Senate Republicans rallied around President Bush and gave him enough breathing room to get the Surge off the Ground.  Arlen Specter was one of those Senate Republicans.

2) John Roberts and Sam Alito -- As Judiciary Committee chairman, Specter did what was necesssary to get President Bush's Supreme Court nominees through the Senate.  He'll do the same with any future Republican President.

3) Senator Chris Matthews -- I just can't handle that.  No way.  I can live with Arlen Specter if it prevents that.

I hope this helps.

Thoughts/Suggestion?!?

Cross-posted from NextGenGOP.

At this point, I don’t think that any of us can effectively predict what the outcome of tomorrow’s elections will be. Quite frankly, I’m not even sure that we’ll know the who the next President of the United States is going to be for many hours, if not days, after polls close. That said, it seems that there are three possible scenarios that could play out in tomorrow’s Presidential election:

1. Barack Obama wins in a huge landslide.
2. Barack Obama wins in a close race.
3. John McCain pulls off an historical upset in a close race.

Barack Obama Wins in a Huge Landslide

This seems to be the narrative that the Leftosphere would like us to believe. This scenario seems to be the most unlikely due to a number of factors, including the huge percentage of undecided voters (which should break for McCain), McCain’s success in raising doubts in the minds of voters about Barack Obama, and Obama’s struggles with working-class voters in states like Pennsylvania and Ohio. Nonetheless, if current polling is to be believed, then we should see a such a landslide with an electoral map looking something like this (this is pulled straight from the RCP “No Toss Up States” map):

Barack Obama Wins in a Close Race

Unfortunately, I strongly believe that this scenario is the most likely. Basically, I see Florida and Ohio departing from their current polling numbers and going for McCain. Obama is polling near, but not at, the 50% mark in each of the states, and I think that the vast majority of undecided voters will swing to McCain in these states, allowing him to win each of them, albeit closely. Thus, the final electoral map in this scenario would look like this:

John McCain Pulls of an Historic Upset in a Close Race

I am extremely hopeful that John McCain can pull off an upset tomorrow. Unfortunately, looking at the electoral maps above, it’s hard to imagine a scenario in which he can accomplish such a difficult feat. However, if it’s going to happen, I think that in addition to Ohio and Florida bucking the current polling trends, so will Pennsylvania and, out of necessity, another state with a couple of electoral votes. Based on current RCP averages, I’m of the opinion that Nevada is the other state most likely to swing.

First, let’s talk about Pennsylvania. I’m Pittsburgh born and raised, and so I’ve lived in Pennsylvania my entire life. As a former Santorum 2006 staffer, I know that accomplishing a statewide victory in Pennsylvania is an incredible challenge for Republicans. However, I also believe that the dynamics of Pennsylvania’s electorate make it the next most likely state to flip from polling projections after Ohio and Florida. No, this isn’t because we’re racist or a bunch of rednecks (although I believe that Murtha’s comments may drive an increased number of Republicans in his district to the polls tomorrow, which is undoubtedly in McCain’s favor). Rather, I believe that the blue collar voters of Pennsylvania, although reliably Democrat, find it extremely difficult to swallow Barack Obama’s “spread the wealth around” policies – and as a result, they may either decide to not vote at all, or to pull the lever for John McCain. Additionally, there are a number of highly competitive Congressional races in PA in which an outcry of Republican voters could help turn the race in favor of McCain. Specifically, I look to William Russell’s race against John Murtha (which I mentioned above), but also to Lou Barletta’s race against the filthy Paul Kanjorski, in which I think Lou will defeat Kanjorski. With Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida going against polling trends, the electoral college stands at 270 for Obama-Biden to 268 for McCain-Palin, requiring one more state to flip for a McCain-Palin victory.

In my eyes, there are two other states that potentially could end up becoming red despite polling that indicates otherwise: Virginia and Nevada. Winning in either of these states will prove difficult for John McCain. However, he only has to flip one of them from its polling trends in order to win. So a McCain-Palin victory might look something like this:

The roadmap to victory for the McCain-Palin ticket is enormously difficult and quite improbable, although certainly not impossible. Some important questions to ponder over the next day or so: Can Barack Obama close? Will the GOP’s vaunted GOTV machine have the success we’ve seen in previous elections? Will young voters turn out in droves, and if so, will they really disproportionately vote for Obama? And, most importantly, does John McCain’s campaign have the ability to pull off an unprecedented and historic electoral victory?