Crash and Burn Day for Dems

Here are the fearless predictions:

House: I was at 50 seats being lost for about a year, then at 57 last week, and now... 67 seats. That's what the generic house poll says, or more. We'll know a bit after 7 PM EST, when VA returns. If the 6D/5R Virginia delegation looks like its headed to a 2D/9R one, we are headed way up there.

Senate: Still at 9 seats. I am going with Adams pulling off an upset win in AK for the Dems. But I am also predicting that the toss-ups, WA/IL/CO/NV/WV all go Republican. Its a 50-50 Senate, with Biden in control, but not for long. There are two fallouts--

1) Palin is going to get thrashed and trashed inside the GOP. She'll be skapegoated for the Republicans not winning the Senate-- it will really all be about '12 by Romney/Pawlenty... supporters.

2) Lieberman, seeing CT go red, "in the interest of Connecticut (himself)" will caucus with the Republicans as an Independent, giving the GOP the Senate majority.

3) I am probably applying Matt Stoller's theorem to the Senate (imagine the most annoying, not the worse, scenario) to a fault. I would probably, if it involved money, bet that Manchin holds on in WV.

Governor: 32 Republican, 17 Democratic, 1 Independent. FL, OH, and CT all go Republican. Chafee wins RI. Yes, Markos, Joe Trippi will have won CA for Jerry Brown. Believe it or not, it actually could wind up worse too, if all the other toss-ups currently going Dem (OR, CO, MN, VT, MA) go instead Republican. Florida is the toughest call, as I think the Sink ads are some of the best for her state, and she leads in Independents, but man, the early voting numbers in Florida are so Republican.

MyDD: Still on beta... will crash and burn early. Save it for another day.

Fallout: Of course this mid-term result is more a rejection of the Democrats, and specifically Obama politics, than it is an embrace of the Republicans. The Obama loyalists will say they are reality-based and that Obama wasn't on the ballot. White liberal intellectuals imply that any potential Democratic '12 challenger is being racially divisive.

Probably the thing to be most hopeful for in 2011 is that, because its Obama's war in Afghanistan, we can help push Republicans to join Democrats in not funding Obama's war.

The other thing to hope for is that SCOTUS throws out the corporate insurance mandate for individuals as unconstitutional.

And pot. I think it will pass in CA; meaning California dreaming has a whole new meaning. If it doesn't pass, it will create an even stronger movement.

Tags: (all tags)



A Scott McAdams win

would bring some sort of positive enthusiasm to the Dems side.

For West Virginia, its all about who goes out to vote today.  If likely, albeit unenthusiastic, Manchin supporters make it to the polls then the Dems should scrape by.  Early voting numbers here, however, are said to lean in favor of Republicans coming out more than Democrats.

 I still think WV voters will reject the plutocratic robber barron Raese and push Manchin in by a very small margin.  Internal polling shows Manchin with a little under 5 points ahead.  

Can't disagree with the rest though, Angle (by some ungodly means) looks like she's going to pull out a victory in Nevada and Giannoullias looks to have too much baggage with his banking past to sway voters.


The newest Rasmussen poll (taken yesterday, 11-01-10) has Obama at a +1 approval though, I found that to be pretty interesting given that its Rasmussen and its likely a GOP election day.

by Chuckie Corra 2010-11-02 07:41AM | 0 recs
RE: A Scott McAdams win

if Ted Strickland goes down Im personally gonna hold this against Obama.

i knew him when he was a democratic hack and i like and admire him very much.

the good news of this night will be that another ex hack - christopher coons - who i worked with on a 1988 senate election where we got crushed - who by the flukes of political whimsy is actually gonna be a friggin senator himself.

thats cool.  hes a good, decent, thoughtful and VERY smart fella.

by changeagain2012 2010-11-02 01:48PM | 0 recs
RE: A Scott McAdams win

In a way its a bit sad how this whole election could potentially work out.   Coons wouldn't have stood a chance (most likely) against any other GOP contender besides the self-destructive O'Donnell.

Its a sad day when admirable Senators like Russ Feingold are ousted as idiots like Sharron Angle are all but on their way to being sworn in.

by Chuckie Corra 2010-11-02 03:41PM | 1 recs
RE: A Scott McAdams win

delaware elects senators for decades


hes gonna be a real, real, REAL good one.

by changeagain2012 2010-11-02 11:46PM | 0 recs
ted lost

Kim Severson reports from Ohio:
Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland just conceded the governorship with a little something from an American legend. Reading from the podium after losing a $30 million race that was as mean as people can remember, he invoked a quote from the singer-songwriter Woodie Guthrie: "I hate a song that makes you think that you are just born to lose. Bound to lose. No good to nobody. No good for nothing. Because you are too old or too young or too fat or too slim or too ugly or too this or too that. Songs that run you down or poke fun at you on account of your bad luck or hard traveling. I am out to fight those songs to my very last breath of air and my last drop of blood. I am out to sing songs that will prove to you that this is your world and that if it has hit you pretty hard and knocked you for a dozen loops, no matter what color, what size you are, how you are built, I am out to sing the songs that make you take pride in yourself and in your work."


what a greatttt guy!


fu obama. now its personal.

by changeagain2012 2010-11-03 01:23AM | 0 recs
RE: ted lost

Because it hasn't been personal up until now?

What are you gonna do in the face of Citizens United?

How are you gonna build an effective grass roots effort to confront the fear-mongering rhetoric of the Tea Party?

How is Howard Dean going to wrest the nomination from a sitting President of his own party, win a general election after doing so, pass a public option, strengthen financial regulation, and get us out of Afghanistan?  How would Hillary Clinton?  Will she do it from within the State Department and Obama's cabinet room?

But none of this seems to matter in the face of personal grievance and righteous self-vindication.  It's personal.  It's about personality.  

Oh, yeah.  And it's the fault of my type, of whom I am the worst example.

I'm PMing you my address so you can make good on your threats to attack me physically.  I promise to make time to indulge your personal grievance, but not much.  I have others with whom I engage who actually want to figure out the way forward.  But I can spare 5 minutes to let you hit me in the face to make you feel better.  Personally.  I only wish I could get you an opportunity to beat Obama up.  Because that would certainly move us forward.

Woody Guthrie would be so proud of you.

by Strummerson 2010-11-03 08:17AM | 0 recs
RE: ted lost

go back to your purple site and plan your take down of mydd you fucking loser of losers.

by changeagain2012 2010-11-03 01:00PM | 0 recs
RE: ted lost

I'm glad you aren't holding back.  This is the opportunity you've been dreaming of for over 2 years now.

Who cares about country, people, or party when there's such a delicious chance for personal vindication.

And I though you were against insults and personal attacks?

I'm not really concerned about MYDD.  Seems like we've got bigger fish to fry.  At least those of us who actually care about our families and futures.

by Strummerson 2010-11-03 01:30PM | 0 recs
RE: ted lost

poor poor you


go grade some mid term papers loser


and what happened to your statement that you were done with me?


as live to pretend that your smarter than others


thats your thing...


tell it to the tenure committee (if you ever even get to one) - see if theyll buy it


i sure dont

by changeagain2012 2010-11-03 07:36PM | 0 recs
RE: ted lost

Once again



you show us



how to avoid




personal attacks




and insults.





Disdain for the academy




seems out of place from





a progressive who, one would think,





respects education.

See.  You really only need to press "Enter" once.






by Strummerson 2010-11-03 08:24PM | 0 recs
RE: ted lost

your not the only one who went to grad school bubby

i remember there were tens of thousands where i went alone

dime a dozen

and i dont have disdain for the academy

the real world is hard as hell

and heck, we gots to have some slots

for those that can't "do"

my disdain is reserved for your type

of arrogant yet inconsequential bores

by changeagain2012 2010-11-03 08:49PM | 0 recs
RE: ted lost

Nope.  You are wrong. I'm the only one who has ever gone to grad school.

The academy is part of the "real world."

Teaching qualifies as "doing."  So does scholarship.  But of course, my place in the world does not begin and end with my profession.

I'm sorry you need to force others through the prism of one of your conceptual "types" in order to make [non]sense of your world.

I'm learning humility from you.

Would I seem more consequential if I kept alluding to close friends in important positions through compulsive almost name dropping?

You clearly do not find me boring.  You can't stop insulting me. 

At least you've dropped this pretense that you oppose personal attacks and insults.  Seems like exactly where your politics and rhetoric start and end.

Come on slugger.  Put your fist across the internet and beat me up.  Aim right at your screen.  Give it your best.

by Strummerson 2010-11-04 12:05AM | 0 recs
racially divisive

or simply likely to lose many many African American voters?

It's not the same thing.  Unless you need it to be, I guess...

Those who are beating the primary drums are going to need to make a difficult case that anyone will give us a better chance and can truly make a go.  I'm extremely skeptical.  The only way I can see Obama  not being the Dem nominee cannot be typed without verging on a federal crime.  I'm assuming that you're not quite there...yet.  As for as primary case, well you've got my attention.  Try to make it.

I absolutely agree about Afghanistan.

Already voted and hitting pavement now.

Enjoy the schadenfreudefest.

by Strummerson 2010-11-02 07:52AM | 1 recs
predictions--not quite as gloomy

Today dawned gray and blustery in North Texas.  Driving to work, I easily came up with a 57-seat pickup for the GOP, then came up with 4-5 more.  Here in Texas, Rick Perry has transformed himself from an ethically challenged with big budget deficit governor to a Tea Party champion and presidential candidate and will win by 9-10%.  They're running against Obama even in state House races.  Texas House goes from 77 Rs to 84 Rs.

Senate 51-49 (Murray hangs on in a recount).  Governors 32-18-1 GOP.  The collapse of Malloy in CT is staggering.

by esconded 2010-11-02 10:10AM | 0 recs
RE: predictions--not quite as gloomy

Also, Prop 19 will fail.  Even SUSA's cellphone friendly final poll had it losing 43-53.  As for the House, I have Oberstar, Skelton, Pingree and Loretta Sanchez losing.

by esconded 2010-11-02 10:27AM | 0 recs
RE: predictions--not quite as gloomy

No way in hell Oberstar loses.  take it from  a Duluth boy.

by lojasmo 2010-11-02 09:29PM | 0 recs

mcAdams loses, and IL/WA/WV/NV all go Democrat.

I've been around just long enough to know that Alaskan polls always oversample the Democrat. This one will be no different.

Superior Dem ground games in IL and NV pull out victories for Reid and Gio.

by likespolitics 2010-11-02 11:17AM | 0 recs
RE: eh

sounds like wishful thinking for a couple of those.  i don't see Reid pulling through in NV

by Chuckie Corra 2010-11-02 12:28PM | 0 recs
RE: eh

we'll find out tonight. I'm not sweating it.

by likespolitics 2010-11-02 03:42PM | 0 recs
RE: eh

I tend to think Jerome is wrong as well; all those results seem "worst case", and I think worst case isn't holding up as a theory: turnout seems higher than many expected, and the national mood doesn't seem thrilled about wholly embracing right wing anything, anymore than left. That tends to favor, I think, a less whole sale shift.

I think Rossi can't close the deal in WA; I think Raese peaked too soon in WV; I'm pretty sure sensible Nevada (not that I think it is overall, but still) will narrowly, but firmly reject Sharron Angle without wildly endorsing Harry Reid (I think "none of these" would look awfully attractive to many). I think Linda McMahon came off more immoderate than Dick Blumenthal in a state that likes boring. I do think Russ Feingold is toast, and that's a shame.

Barbara Boxer will ride Jerry Brown's coattails to victory, and she ought to be grateful, because she's really been thoroughly uninspiring.

I think Strickland managed to edge out Kasich, for no clear reason (did Kasich develop a likability problem? he seemed nice before), but the Seante race is lost (ticket splitting between D and R mystifies me, generally; I think one should pick a party and stick). I think Rubio won't get past 50%, making his ascension talk premature and possibly even embarrassing. Alex Sink will also pull it out, making her the real night's rising star.

I think we will wind up with Mark Kirk or Alexi Giannoulias, and both options are lousy. Ditto Colorado, but I think Bennett may have the edge.

And Joe Sestak. Proving you can underestimate a guy, twice. And Lisa Murkowski, because it will piss off Sarah Palin, an idea which I think many Alaskans find amusing.

In general, I think Democrats have been uninspiring, but many voters turned out because the alternatives looked worse. And while the House is probably lost - it's easy, and more painless to punish the two year candidate - I don't think Republicans really natiuonalized their argument or offered enough plans to reassure enough people to make the leap. And maybe it is a rout and maybe there's a 50-50 Senate in our future (I tend to agree, at that moment... Joe Lieberman sees the way the wind is blowing, and switches)... but the bigger problem is come tomorrow, the general landscape will still be about the same. And neither party will offer much in the way of solutions.

by nycweboy1 2010-11-02 06:37PM | 0 recs
RE: eh

you might not like Gio (and many don't due to his banking troubles and the general apathy by Democratic and/or liberal bloggers), but he would be among the most liberal senators if elected. 


by likespolitics 2010-11-02 06:48PM | 0 recs
RE: eh

there we go. 1-0 for both of us. W.V. gets called for Manchin. Although he might as well switch to the G.O.P. party in his victory speach.

by likespolitics 2010-11-02 08:43PM | 0 recs
RE: eh

looks like I'll be wrong on IL and CO.

by likespolitics 2010-11-02 10:58PM | 0 recs
RE: eh

actually, got them all right except IL.

I was 4-1 (5-0 in partisan breakdown).

by likespolitics 2010-11-03 10:50AM | 0 recs

Our polls close at 6pm eastern and we're possibly going from a 5-4 Democratic delegation to a 7-2 Republican delegation.

by Vox Populi 2010-11-02 11:41AM | 0 recs
The problem is the neo-liberals within the Democratic Party and the

consultants they road into office with pedaling that half baked crap.

Half baked crap is still crap and it wasn't the 'Change' people voted for - and they didn't vote primarily for 'bi-partisanship'either despite what the 45th POTUS thinks.

Why is it so hard for Democratic politicians to understand that 'CHANGE" means 'fundamentally different than before'? Weak, wimpy, and worthless, and this drubbing was predictable within hours of Obama naming Rahm as COS.

I will never be able to watch the movie Groundhog Day without thinking of Rahm and Obama and repeating '94....when they did not have to.


by merbex 2010-11-02 12:51PM | 2 recs
RE: The problem is the neo-liberals within the Democratic Party and the

Actually, it WAS the change people voted for.  If you look at his campaign promises and compare it to what we actually got, you'll see again and again and again that they're virtually the same.  This includes health care and banking reform and nearly everything else.  Yes there are a few examples of progressives not getting all they want, but there's also examples of progressive winning major victories not even campaigned on (of course THIS site steadfastly refuses to report any of this because they're following the Obama-betrayed-us meme to the death).

The problem isn't progressives not getting what they voted for, it's them not knowing what they voted for.  They think that they voted for Kucinich and now are mad at him because he's governing like Obama.  They're mad because he's not the fantasy Obama they had in their head.

The problem isn't that he made a deal with this party or that party the problem isn't that he betrayed us.  The problem is that the people we've intrusted to spread the word about what is actually happening are in this utopian masturbotory fantasy world where true progressivism will happen once we take out a President who's not quite perfectly progressive.  Of course just the opposite is true.  If they take this President out after he's passed health care rerform, banking reform and a host of other legislation liberals have been clamoring for for generations that's it.  No president will ever try to do big things ever again.  Because they'll know, correctly that the base will not have their back should they be forced to make ANY compromise, no matter how slight.

Before you come up with your inevitable stupid-ass naive as hell talking points listing all the ways that Obama supposedly betrayed us (he made a deal with Pharma! (link) he made a deal with a blue dog! (link) He made a deal with a banker! (link)) I will ask you to name ONE piece of major legislation that was perfect and pure as soon as it was introduced?  The constitution itself involved an unsavory deal allowing slavery South of the 36th parallel and a two house Congress.  Is it or was it perfect?  No, but it's damn better than the Articles of Confederation were.  Lincoln had to make some unsavory deals with the Border states to keep them in the Union.  Was it desirable?  No.  But it's better than the North losing the war.  The emancipation proclamation excluded those border states from its effect.  Should that imperfection stopped him from issuing it? 

I believe if the blogosphere was around then they'd say so.  They'd also consider Social security which didn't cover all seniors at the time, medicaire which only covered those over 65 AND medicaid all "sell outs".  And nothing would of gotten passed which would of course mean that MILLIONS of older Americans would suffer for their purism.  What is it about the psychology of so many liberals that causes them to be so self destructive?  The exact same thing happened in 2000 when Maureen Dowd and Frank Rich insured the destruction of Al Gore because he wasn't pure enough (I recall frank insisting there was no difference between the two candidates!).  And now we have the same stupid bullshit happening again.  People claiming to be authorities, not knowing what they're talking about and other people who long to be disapointed glomming on in a mutually masturbatory pity party.

This president has delivered on his promises and the blogosphere failed to deliver for him out of simple spite.  They are the liberal fox news, following an agenda, not reality.

by insipid 2010-11-02 07:00PM | 0 recs
RE: The problem is the neo-liberals within the Democratic Party and the


wrong and the idea that Dowd and Rich went after gore because he wasnt pure enough is the most ridiculous thing Ive read about that election or the MSM in a long, long time. I suggest you go to the archives of Bob Somerby's daily howler and read up about how your view of that history is wrong, wrong, wrong and maybe also pick up some idea of whats happening now thats outside your - poor misunderstood and unappreciated Obama bubble. wrong I worked in the pro Gore DC activist political media in 2000 and the idea that Dowd and Rich went after gore because he wasnt pure enough is the most ridiculous thing Ive read about that election or the MSM in a long, long time. I suggest you go to the archives of Bob Somerby's daily howler and read up about how your view of that history is wrong, wrong, wrong and maybe also pick up some idea of whats happening now thats outside your - poor misunderstood and unappreciated Obama bubble.


by changeagain2012 2010-11-02 08:04PM | 0 recs
RE: The problem is the neo-liberals within the Democratic Party and the

I worked in the pro Gore DC activist political media in 2000 and the idea that Dowd and Rich went after gore because he wasnt pure enough is the most ridiculous thing Ive read about that election or the MSM in a long, long time.

I suggest you go to the archives of Bob Somerby's daily howler and read up about how your view of that history is wrong, wrong, wrong and maybe also pick up some idea of whats happening now thats outside your - poor misunderstood and unappreciated Obama bubble.

by changeagain2012 2010-11-02 08:08PM | 0 recs
RE: The problem is the neo-liberals within the Democratic Party and the

If liberals knew obama would botch financial and health care reform, maybe they would have hoped for health care reform to be tabled in favor of using that leverage to enact many other reforms. obama could have enacted so many other progressive reforms  in finance , EPA, FDA, stimulus if he didn't touch health care. Just expand medicaid to include preventive care and emergency care for a bigger segment of population and call it a day until the next term.

So you are wondering why such a tactic of forgoing one so called liberal piece of the agena health care reform in favor of many other progressive reforms would help Obam. I will tell you why. If you enact a liberal policy like improving the environment, the non- political non-liberal would not like it, but they wont obsess over it because it doesn't have a direct impact on their life. It is like the auto bailout. Quite frankly, I was grumbing aobut it too. But at the same time, it did not fdirectly affect my car choices. So that lack of direct government intrusion in my life regarding cars bought enough time for me to see how well that bailout turned out. Same with clean water and air. You can show with visceral examples how their life can be improved. There are mining disasters Obama could have used in timely fashion to explain the importance of regulations. People tend to be more receptive right after a disaster to see how they can avoid another one. People who are not rabid right winger would buy into it or at least be neutral about it.


But when you start passing convoluted health care bills, you are giving them the perception that helping others will affect their quality of life directly. Then they get mad, and some of them get carried away by irrational talking points about seemingly related issues such as stimulus. If the health care bill wasnt a mess, it would have been hard for right wingers to tar the stimulus as a waste. Stimulus was a good talking point before the health care mess. But now it has become a sneer worthy talking point with non-progressives. So one policy has tarred another policy.

Janet Neopalatino didnt deliver on smarter Homeland Security. More of the same old "appearances" crap. TSA is still an asinine entity that tried to come up with insane regulations after the African guy tried to annhilate his own genitals.

The military budget is still the same despite some efforts by Gates and Co. to pare down some unnecessary weapons.

Is there any framework to get school reform in the next 2 years?  Too little. I guarantee African American majority schools in poor neighborhoods will still be pathetic under an Obama presidency.

Obama said change and got us Summers and Geithner. PEOPLE DID NOT SIGN UP FOR THAT KIND OF CHANGE.


Financial reform was too little too late. Even if I am against TARP, I recognize it as an opportunity to have gotten it tied with finanical reform. But Obama missed that boat and lost all leverage when he tried to reform the system later on. Obama is just too slow to capitalize on a disaster to use leverage.

Obama didn't reform the MMS.


The EPA is better but has it done enough for clean water and air? What has the senate done with 60 Dem votes? Forget global warming, get better environmental conditions that even rural common folk can relate to. Fresh air fresh water. Keep it simple.


by Pravin 2010-11-02 08:49PM | 0 recs

would i love to see the CA pot thing pass.  wouldnt that be wild?

i have heard a couple of other people predict that lieberman would caucus with the GOP - but i dont buy it.

people always forget that lieberman has close to a 100% pro labor record and always has.  his campaigning base is labor and i know some pol directors of natl AFL unions that consider him to be their closest personal friend in the senate.

obviously - anything is possible if he becomes THE deciding vote and is offered the world - but i would be surprised.

as to tonight - i gave up even wondering what's what about 6 hours ago. 

by changeagain2012 2010-11-02 01:38PM | 0 recs
ill make one prediction though

Senator to be Rubio is officially offered the GOP VP nomination in the next few days and the next 18 months will all be about who is going to be his running mate.

How many states will he bring immideately over to the GOPs needed 270?

That's the question.

by changeagain2012 2010-11-02 01:42PM | 0 recs

Jerome will make money.

by Trey Rentz 2010-11-02 01:53PM | 0 recs
Early turnout

I can only offer what I saw. Went to vote at 11:30a, turnout was heavy for that time of the day. One of the folks at the polling place, said it seemed more like a Presidential election based upon the large early turnout.....

by BuckeyeBlogger 2010-11-02 02:20PM | 0 recs
RE: Early turnout

id pray for ted if i prayed.

by changeagain2012 2010-11-02 03:52PM | 1 recs
RE: Early turnout

But who did they vote for? Is the heavy turnout to repudiate Obama and the sick sick Illinois Democratic Party?  I'll know in about seven hours.

by antiHyde 2010-11-02 06:20PM | 0 recs

Dem policy-makers and strategists will actually realize enthusiasm-gap is not Kinsey's prose for bedding an uninspiring partner, but your base staying home. There should be at least two of these original thinkers - for every thousand. One will try to partner up with Jerome. Jerome will still not make any money.

by totoRULES 2010-11-02 02:29PM | 0 recs
RE: Prediction

insult delivered.

feel better?

by changeagain2012 2010-11-02 03:53PM | 0 recs
RE: Prediction

Perhaps you should threaten violence...

by Strummerson 2010-11-02 03:57PM | 0 recs
I do feel pretty good,

but I am afraid you are trying to piss on the wrong post, 2012. I am just hanging around for a few hours to size up the wreck I knew was coming a nanosecond after the super delegates shifted for Mr Sunshine. Go bite some Obama's buffoons, I'm sure there are some lurking around the site

by totoRULES 2010-11-02 04:24PM | 1 recs
RE: I do feel pretty good,

only commnting on this line and i think i misunderstood


"Jerome will still not make any money."


you meant on the innertrade betting network didnt you?


if so, my apologies.

by changeagain2012 2010-11-02 08:15PM | 0 recs
Post election, look for the official White House enemies list

Obama's talk last week about the need to "punish your enemies"---while not surprising---was sickening, and not appealing to most voters. Obama is a petulant, thin-skinned little squirt who is in so far over his head that it's frightening.

About a year ago, I wrote here that the one President Obama resembles most closely is Richard Nixon. He has all of Nixon's bad qualities, and none of his good ones. He is humorless, self-absorbed, and paranoid about media outlets that he regards as unfriendly. Nixon was obsessed with the treatment he got from the Washington Post; fast forward to today, where Obama whines at least once a week about how mean Fox News is to him. He needs to man up and get over it.

And with Obama now going public about his intention to "punish his enemies", the comparison with Nixon is complete. We've all seen this movie before, and it has a bad ending. Obama is going to get a whipping today, and the President you see thereafter will be nastier than ever.


by BJJ Fighter 2010-11-02 02:51PM | 0 recs
RE: Post election, look for the official White House enemies list

some lifelong democratic party folk agree

Our Divisive President Barack Obama promised a new era of post-partisanship. In office, he's played racial politics and further split the country along class and party lines.
by changeagain2012 2010-11-02 03:45PM | 0 recs
RE: Post election, look for the official White House enemies list

this piece goes all nixonian on Obama.

He was the ONE too.

by changeagain2012 2010-11-02 03:45PM | 0 recs
RE: Post election, look for the official White House enemies list

ooops - posted wrong piece by shoen and caddell

this is the one from the wash post 3 days ago that says Obama is going all Nixonian on us.

A divisive Obama undercuts the presidency

by changeagain2012 2010-11-02 03:50PM | 0 recs
NV-SEN what to watch for tonight

After early vote (which ended Fri night) Dems hold about a 25K vote advantage in Clark and a 9K advantage in raw turnout statewide. Independent turnout running below historic norms for an off-year election. That means that with over 60% of the votes cast, Reid is almost certainly ahead going into the final third of the election.

A few things to watch for when returns come in.

Clark County early return results are usually posted first, about 7:35-7:45 Pacific time. We will know a lot from the early vote results in Clark. If, on the one hand, Angle is losing even 1 % or 2 to NOTC or the Tea Party candidate, and if Reid is holding her margin among independents down to the single digits, his lead will be 25K to 30K votes (8 to 10%). If, on the other, she is winning independents by 20% in the early vote, or he's losing Dems, as Republicans hope, the margin will be down at about 17K (6%). If its at the high end, more than 8%; Reid will have the first piece in place for victory. IF its less than 7%, Reid will be in a tough spot. 

Washoe early vote will report next, generally before 8pm local time (11pm eastern). Washoe is her home county, and an historically moderately republican one but which Obama carried. If Angle has a lead of less than 4000 in the early vote here (thats 5% of the Washoe early vote) that is good news for Reid. Less than 2500 votes (3%) and it means Angle is losing moderate republicans from her base. If Angle is sweeping republicans and winning independents heavily, she'll have a margin of between 5 and 8 K in the Washoe early vote (6 to 10%).

So its good news for Reid at this point if he's leading by more than 20K votes. If he's winning by much less than 15K, his back will be against the wall. Early vote from the rest of the state will generally be reported sometime between 8 and 8:30pm. Angle is likely to win this big, possibly 2-1. But early voting in the rural counties will represent only about 14 % of total statewide early vote (about 42K). So she's hoping for a margin close to 20K. Reid will be doing well if he holds her down below 15K.

Or, put differenlty, the candidate ahead after all the early vote has reported is going to be feeling very confident. If either one is leading by more than 2%, thats a very strong position.
At that point, the nets will have the benefit of e-day exit polling to be able to start to build projections of the final outcome. If at any point in the evening, tv coverage is talking about how many provisional ballots were cast, thats a sign they are thinking about calling it for Angle. If, on the other hand, they are talking about reports of vote fraud, its a sign Reid is running ahead of projections and the GOP is getting desperate.

But if its still too close to call (and there's a good chance it'll be a margin of less than 1000 votes either way after early vote is tallied), the key  to Reid's chances at that point will be whether he can reverse the trend of the last three cycles and win election day. That will require winning Clark County by a big margin (more than 10K votes).

That would require a big turnout, esp in heavily democratic CD1, and a lot of late-breaking independents to decide against Angle. Clark's election day vote tends to report slowly on election night, with few precincts coming in before 9pm.

If Clark does go well for him, he's likely to surge past her into the lead between 930 and 1030 as the heavily African-American and Latino precincts of central and eastern Las Vegas report. However, the bigger the turnout in these precincts, the later they will be to report. And since Washoe reports most of its result in this same time window, its not likley to be evident whats happening from just the statewide percentages.

In a winning scenario, unless Clark's count gets bogged down (as it did in 08 by huge turnout), Reid wants to be in the lead by at least 15K, hopefully closer to 20K, sometime between 1030 and 11. (Later if the urban Clark vote is held up).

Then, the rural precincts in the outlying areas of Clark and of Washoe come in and then the rural counties report their small, but heavily republican tallies.

Under no circumstances will Angle concede; she's still never conceded her two primary losses in 06 and 08. She's more likely to sue than concede. If Reid is behind by fewer votes than the # of provisional ballots cast, which could be several thousand, he is unlikely to concede and it will take at least three days for those to be verified and counted.
by desmoulins 2010-11-02 03:37PM | 1 recs
RE: NV-SEN what to watch for tonight

good info

by changeagain2012 2010-11-02 03:55PM | 0 recs
All I can add to desmoulins is..

that turnout in my district is off the charts. In some places, there's a huge battle going on. This is the same place that handed Sarah Palin her first big defeat in the primaries. It will be fun to see what happens.


Mostly. Go out and vote people. Don't sit here and guess. Just vote.

by Trey Rentz 2010-11-02 03:53PM | 1 recs
RE: All I can add to desmoulins is..

I voted. Suburban Cook County Illinois. Turnout is heavy. But for who(m)?

by antiHyde 2010-11-02 06:23PM | 0 recs
by changeagain2012 2010-11-02 11:42PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads