Lamar Smith and Steve King: The Paradigm Committee Chairmen

When the Republican led 112th congress is sworn in next January, the magnitude of the turnover will be most evident on the Judiciary Committee.  Instead of radical John Conyers heading the committee, we will have border champion Lamar Smith as chairman.  Also, instead of Zoe Lofgren chairing the Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship, Steve King will lead that panel.  Today, the Miami Herald is reporting that Congressman King plans to go after birthright citizenship during the next congress.  While other Republicans are intimidated by the left's demagoguery and distortion of the 14th amendment, King realizes that the constitution never meant to bestow citizenship upon babies that are illegally thrown across the border.

This latest news concerning Steve King made me reflect on what we are lacking in leadership of other vital House committees.  For many years, we have been conditioned to accept the reality that important committees (A's and B's) will be chaired by the old bull, compromising, Democrat light veterans.  We see this playing out in regard to the chairmanships of the Energy and Approps Committees.  But why should we settle for mediocrity when it comes to committee chairmanships?  Why should we have our weakest link on spending issues chair the Appropriations Committee, or a big government statist chair the Energy and Commerce Committee?

We should have our toughest guns who have excelled in those particular issues lead the committee.  Lamar Smith and Steve King have fought against illegal immigration for years and therefore rightfully deserve the leadership of those panels which deal with immigration related issues.  However, when you examine the seniority of the other committees you find that at best the leadership is mediocre and at worst it is Democrat light.  This is why the Judiciary Committee stands out to me as a guide for who should be appointed Chairman of their respective committees.

Republicans Must Eliminate Ethanol Mandate

The government's ethanol mandates embody everything that is wrong with Democrats, RINOs, and Marxists.  It is an unconstitutional regulation that has enriched a few special interests with $7.7 billion taxpayer dollars, regressively drove up the cost of food and fuel; and by extension all products and services that rely on fuel based delivery.  The tax credits for energy producers who blend fuel with ethanol have created so many unintended (or intended by some)  negative consequences that even Al Gore is calling for its repeal.  The tax credits are slated to expire in one month and yet, we have not heard much from the newly elected Republican majority in the House.  Is your Republican Congressman more conservative than Al Gore?

According to analysts at Goldman Sachs, the ethanol industry consumes 41% of the domestic corn crop.  Corn is at the top of the food chain, so by creating an artificial shortage in supply of corn, the feds have caused a spike in the cost of meat and chicken as well. In addition, it costs much more to produce a barrel of ethanol than it does a barrel of oil.  Also, aside for providing corporate welfare to domestic ethanol producers, the government slapped high tariffs on imported ethanol.  This prevents us from importing cheaper, more efficient sugar based ethanol from Brazil.  All of this leads to higher prices for home heating and gasoline for cars.  The costs for trucks are even more devastating, as most domestic products that are transported by trucks are now more expensive for consumers.

Every Republican needs to make this a top priority.  Energy is the lifeblood of our economy, while fuel and food represent the basic needs of the low income Americans whom the liberals purport to defend.  This is a perfect opportunity for us to push a prudent policy that will "stimulate" the economy, save taxpayer dollars, put corrupt lobbyists on the defense, and make political hay from it as the same time.  However, does anyone believe that Fred Upton would support repeal of ethanol if he were to become Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee?  Call your congressman and tell him/her to vote to repeal the Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit.

Joe Manchin, The Left Wing Lapdog for Radical Feminism

We knew that it wouldn't take too long for Joe Manchin to shed his conservative camouflage and leave it behind in the Mountain state.  Well, it turns out that he has gone all in for the job killing, socialist agenda on his first day in the Senate.  After voting to make anti gun, cap and trade supporting Harry Reid Majority Leader, Manchin voted with Reid on two other measures yesterday.  He voted for the job killing FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (S. 510) and the Paycheck Fairness Act(S. 3772).

We already detailed some of the egregious provisions of the food bill, as well as the disappointing fact that 14 Republicans supported it.  Luckily, the Republicans held together and blocked cloture on the paycheck social engineering bill by a 58-41 vote.  Ben Nelson was the only Democrat to oppose both measures, while Manchin voted in goose step with the leadership.  This bill does not mandate equal pay for women with the same education, experience, and qualifications for the same job in the same place of employment.  That was already required in the original equal Pay Act of 1963.  The only purpose of this law is to expand the requirement to peg women's wages to established salaries for males everywhere.  This will expose job creators to potential litigation demanding established male wages of other workplaces or other regions that have a higher cost of living.  The only possible outcome of such legislation would be increased unemployment and higher costs to produce goods and services during a recession.  So this bill is taxation, regulation, and litigation rolled up in one monstrosity.  Yet, Joe Manchin didn't bat an eyelash as he cast his vote in support of this bill.

Manchin will stand for reelection in 2012 with Obama on the ballot in a solid red state.  There is no reason why he shouldn't be defeated in a walk.  Any takers?

14 Republican Vote for New Nanny State Regulations on Food Producers

If there is anything that is clear from the outcome of the elections, it is that we have barely changed the Senate.  Yes, we have gained some seats and moved some Republican open seats to the right for the 112th congress.  However, there are still many Republicans that remain in the Senate who have shown no signs of changing their big government tendencies.  Today, 14 Republicans joined every Democrat (except Ben Nelson, who is obviously pandering to keep his seat) to invoke cloture on the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (S. 510).  Aside for the fact that this bill will add more layers of bureaucracy and expenses to the FDA and DOA, it will also burden food producers with more onerous regulations and kill jobs.  There is no evidence that this will improve the safety of our food, which is already the safest in the world.  As Tom Coburn so aptly explained:

"Fixing the real problems is about making the bureaucracy work right, not adding more layers and rules and bureaucracy," Coburn said. "I want us to have food safety, but for every dollar additionally spent, how much can you really improve? We have the safest food in the world, but you can't get to 100 percent. So at what point do you stop spending additional dollars? It's like homeland security. Can we ever spend enough money to be absolutely sure nothing happens? No, we can't."

Here is the list of Obama's Republicans:

Any Supporter of START is a RINO

While there is much debate concerning how "big of a tent" the Republican Party should be concerning social issues, there is no excuse for any Republican to damage our national security and support unilateral disarmament.  The START treaty is a unilateral demand proposed by Vladimir Putin and its sole intent is to weaken our missile capabilities and our deterrent against Russia.

When the treaty was first taken up in the Senate, I figured that it lacked 51 votes, much less the 67 super majority that is required for its ratification.  After all, who except for the fringe left would support a treaty that is being forced upon us by our sworn enemies that are known to violate every treaty on record.  As it turns out, there are no clear opponents of the treaty in the Democrat Party, while there are a number of Republicans who are considering supporting it.  Senators Isackson, Lugar, and Corker already voted for the treaty in committee.  This doesn't even include the list of usual RINOs.  Now, Minority Whip John Kyl sounds like he thinks there is something to consider with START.  All the headlines today are focused on the fact that Kyl opposes the consideration of the treaty in the lame duck session.  Here is what Kyl had to say:

Congress Can Implement Attrition through Enforcement Illegal Immigration Policy

The pro open borders advocates in both parties often present the American people with the false choice of amnesty or physically rounding up every last illegal alien.  They assert that deportations are so unpractical and distasteful that the only way to solve the illegal immigration problem is by legalizing them.  Those with some sense of sanity have always realized that the source of the problem is our criminal incentivizing of illegal behavior, and a concerted effort to enforce the laws would drain the illegal population through "attrition by enforcement".  Here are two immigration related updates that vividly illustrate the effectiveness of enforcement and the disaster of enticement.

Fox News reported last week that according to a recent study, roughly 100,000 illegals have left Arizona since the passage of SB 1070. In fact, the Mexican government is claiming that almost 25,000 illegals have returned to Mexico.  The amazing thing is that the major provision of SB 1070 is not even being enforced due to the court injunction.  This just proves that a mere perception of enforcement will make the environment inhospitable for illegals, forcing them to go home.  Let's call it attrition before enforcement.

The Sorry State of the Maryland GOP

Several major Democrat leaders in PG County have been arrested, including County Executive Jack Johnson.  Yet, there is no noise coming from the Maryland GOP.  In order to win elections we need to register on the political map.  Unfortunately, in Maryland, the GOP never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.  Here is a sober commentary from our friends at Red Maryland:

"Jack Johnson has long had a reputation for questionable ethics.

Democrat Leslie Johnson has just been elected to represent PG Council District 6. No Republican ran against her.

Council District 6 largely overlaps General Assembly District 25. The Democratic Senator from that district is under federal indictment on numerous counts. No Republican ran against him.

I am unaware of any official Republican Party statements concerning the indictment of Sen. Currie or previous questions raised about Jack Johnson's behavior in office.

The Republican Party is unlikely to make much progress in rebuilding itself in Maryland when it sits idly by, not challenging corrupt Democratic politicians at the polls or in the media."

I would add that this is also occurring in the same year that Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon was removed from office for stealing target gift cards that were intended to be given to charity.  What vice do the Democrats need to committ in order to solicit a strong reaction from the GOP?

Democrat Media Hosting Republican Presidential Debates

Presidential primary politics has already begun to percolate into the media following the midterm elections.  There is now discussion of hosting the first GOP primary debate at the Reagan Library as early as this coming spring.  While many conservatives are upset that we are already contemplating debates before the field of candidates is set, I have another bone to pick concerning this development. 

Politico announced yesterday that they will be sponsoring that debate at the Reagan Library along with ...... NBC news!  This is astounding.  We have already ceded over the general election debates to be controlled and orchestrated by the Democrat media.  Do we need to have them moderate our own primary debates as well?  Keep in mind that these media types live in a very different world than we do, and their policy premises and understanding of the political dynamic makes them unqualified to moderate a debate among conservatives.

We should have at least one debate that is moderated by a panel of respected conservative journalists, talk radio figures, and others who would frame the debate in a meaningful way to conservatives. Yet, we are going to let those who garner vociferous antipathy towards conservatives have the opportunity to influence the selection of our leader!  Do we really need moderators who will ask the candidate what they will do to curb global warming?

House GOP: Forget About the Symbolism, Let's go for the Meat and Potatoes

There has been a pervasive misconception that has been promulgated by those within and outside of the Republican Party concerning the power of the GOP House majority .  They assert that because the Democrats control the other branches of government, there is no way we can pass any meaningful conservative legislation until 2012.

There seems to be an assumption that we can only scuttle the passage of new nefarious bills, and should sit pretty until we can win back the Presidency.  In fact, they believe that our only proactive legislative agenda should be one that involves issues in which we can seek common ground with the Democrats, thus garnering positive media for leading a productive and bi-partisan congress.  This view of the political landscape is counterproductive and will lead to the same unsuccessful cycle of 94'-06', in which we failed to deliver on conservative change and eventually forfeited the majority.

The Republican House leaders have floated some good ideas concerning reform in procedures and parliamentary rules.  We always welcome more transparency in government and fully support the decentralization of power in the House as well as the posting of legislation online before its passage.  However, these changes are full of symbolism, but lack any real substantial element of conservative change.  So, we will post legislation on the internet 72 hours before the vote.  But which legislation?  Are we going to squander our historical mandate on symbolism, procedural reform, and playing defense; without a coherent and proactive policy agenda to strike out at the heart of the welfare and regulatory state?

We all realize that the Democrats still control the Senate and the Presidency, but we will control the most effective legislative body.  Unlike in the Senate, we will have full operational control of the House and have the ability to pass anything (assuming that there aren't too many Rinos left).  Let's get to work on our conservative agenda and let the Democrats and Obama vote down our proposals that will undoubtedly remain popular with the public.  Here is a list of agenda items that we should shove down the throats of the Democrats every week, while forcing them to be on the wrong side of popular legislation with the public:

Florida Exit Poll: Rubio and Scott won the Hispanic Vote

We are lectured ad nauseum by the open borders Republicans about the electoral devastation that is looming if we fail to enact an amnesty program.  They assert that our strong support for borders and immigration enforcement will drive away all Hispanic voters.  Well, the Miami Herald observes that not only didn't we get swamped by Hispanics; we actually won their vote outright in Florida.  Both Marco Rubio and Rick Scott campaigned on their support for Arizona SB 1070.  In fact, Rick Scott won his stunning upset over Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum exclusively due to his promise of implementing a similar law in Florida.  We were told that Scott would be viewed like David Duke by most Hispanic voters.  To those who understand the importance of immigration enforcement, the election results are not surprising.  Here is the exit polling data from Florida, as reported in the Miami Herald:

Republican Marco Rubio, who is Cuban-American, got 55 percent of the Hispanic vote in the U.S. Senate race, compared to no-party Charlie Crist with 23 percent and Democrat Kendrick Meek with 21 percent. Republican Rick Scott got 50 percent of the Hispanic vote in the governor's race, while Democrat Alex Sink got 48 percent.

Mark Kirk Might Vote for Disclose Act

Here we go again.  The same vicious cycle seems to repeat itself ad nauseum.  We become all excited about the prospects of picking up Senate seats during the election.  Then, within a few days these RINOs return to their old ways.  The Hill is reporting that Mark Kirk is considering whether to vote with the Democrats and support the unconstitutional Disclose Act.  Even though he voted against this particular bill while he was in the House, he is showing willingness to sell himself out to liberal special interest groups that are pressuring RINOs to support this legislation.  Here is what Kirk had to say for himself:

“Federal candidates should disclose all of their campaign contributions within 24 hours on the Internet. I hope we can get that done in the next Senate and Congress. Also, for all of these outside groups we don’t want to silence any political voice ... we should have them disclose all of their donors, both from the left and the right.”



The Hill further notes, that these liberal advocacy groups will be pressuring Lisa Murkowski to support the Disclose Act.  There is no doubt in my mind that if she ultimately returns to the Senate, she will take revenge against Republicans and support much of the signature legislation of the left.  There is very little hope for Senate Republicans, even after last week's gains.  The House is where we need to make our stand.  This all brings me back to my favorite cartoon that my wife illustrated in honor of our Senate Republicans:

Bright Prospects for GOP Farm Team

After examining the results of state and local elections, it appears that the lower  the profile of the election, the better the result for conservatives.  In other words, where the Democrat/media smear machine was silent, the majority of the voters picked the Republican.  This explains our historic margins in the state legislature races across the country.  In addition, we picked up 6 Secretary of State offices and 5 (or 6, depending upon the fraud in California) Attorneys General offices.  See more about those races here.

After examining the down the ticket races more carefully, it appears that we have picked up 8 offices that are roughly the equivalent to the CFO of the state.  In some states they are referred to as Comptroller, in others they are the state Treasurer or CFO.  We picked up those seats in Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Mississippi, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin.  As you can see, some of those turnovers were in vital swing states.  These positions are important, not just because of their control over the budget, but also as future farm teams for higher office.  Overall, we are in a very good position to field quality candidates in every swing state for the foreseeable future.

Two More New York House Seats in Play

For all of the talk concerning the Republican's dismal showing in the northeast, we did exceptionally well in New York.  We picked up five seats across the state, and now there is a possibility that we can win two remaining contested seats.  In NY-25, Republican Ann Marie Buerkle is now leading Democratic Rep. Dan Maffei by 659 votes.  With many staunch Republican military ballots yet to be counted, I am confident that we will pull this one out.  This is quite significant because NY-25 (which represents Syracuse and it's suburbs) is actually rated D+3 by Charlie Cook, and would represent one of the few D seats that we successfully flipped this cycle.

The big news over the weekend was in NY-1 (Suffolk County, Long Island) in which an error in a ballot machine has turned a certain victory for the incumbent Democrat into a possible defeat.  On election night, Democrat Tim Bishop was ahead of Republican Randy Altschuler by 3,400 votes.  This race was actually called for Bishop fairly early in the night.  Amazingly, over the weekend, the local board of elections discovered an error in one machine that has now created a 400 vote lead for Altschuler.  According to the AP, "Board of Elections commissioner Wayne Rogers said the original numbers were reported by telephone and relayed through intermediaries before being entered into the county's computer system."

There were a bunch of House races in which the Democrat won by just a few thousand votes.  One has to wonder how many other races were erroneously called for Democrats.  It is amazing to me that the Democrats seem to win almost every close race, or any race that goes past election day.  These two races in New York might turn out to be exceptions to the rule.  If that is the case, we will net 7 seats from New York, the most of any state in the country.  If not for the conservative/Republican split in NY-23, in which Doug Hoffman remained on the ballot, we would have flipped that seat as well.  How ironic that our biggest victory in the House elections would have occurred in the bluest of states!  One could only imagine what would have happened had we had substantive challengers on the top of the ticket.

Election 2010: A Look at Some Down the Ticket Races

 There has been a lot of focus on the major Republican victories in state legislatures.  Most people haven't focused as much on some of the other statewide races across the country.  Well, according to preliminary results, it appears that we have won some Attorney General and Secretary of State offices in several key states.  It is important to note that these offices are vital to our efforts to augment our farm team of future candidates in some key states.  Many Gubernatorial and Senatorial candidates in recent years have been AG's or SOS's.  Here is a brief synopsis of the Republican victories in these key races:

Secretaries of State

We have previously expressed the importance of this office due to the election fraud laws that are being passed by Democrats across the country.  It appears that we have picked up 6 of these offices, some of them in key swing states.  There will be new Republican Secretaries of State in Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas (Kris Kobach), Iowa, New Mexico, and the all important state of Ohio.  In New Mexico, there hasn't been a Republican SOS since 1928!  Also, in Oklahoma, the Governor picks the Sec. of State.  Currently, a Democrat occupies that office, but that will change with the inauguration of Mary Fallin.  In January, Republicans will control 26 Sec. of State offices, while Democrats will control 20.

Attorneys General

These positions have growing importance due to the coming state's rights clashes in the realm of issues such as immigration, health care, and environmental regulations.  Our election primer on the AG races is here. We could have done a little better on the AG front, but it appears that we have picked up at least 5 offices.  We have added Arizona, Georgia, Kansas, Ohio, and Oklahoma to the list of state AG's that we control.  The Democrats still control 27 of these offices.

A Comprehensive Roundup of our Stunning Victory

Earlier today, I tried to put some of the disappointing Senate news in perspective. Now, with the negative news out of the way, let's sift through the rubble and reflect on the amazing news of the night. Here is a rundown and analysis of our victories in the House.  Later, we will analyze the state legislature and AG races.

House

It looks like we have a stunning 65 or so net gain on our hands.  Aside for the amazing fact in itself that we have picked up the most seats since 1946, and are poised to hold the most seats since the 20's, there is much more positive news in this result than meets the eye.  Normally, when one party wins more than 30 seats, let alone 65, they must immediately prepare for the arduous task of holding those seats for the next cycle.  This year is different.  If you look at the electoral map, the Republicans actually barely won any D rated districts (using the Cook PVI), while they kicked out almost every Democrat from an R rated district.  This represents a permanent realignment.  In fact, there are still a few more seats on the table in which we came close to winning.  If we can recruit more good candidates we can wipe out the remaining red seat Dems.  It is also important to notice that those few remaining blue dogs are the most conservative Democrats.  So basically the Democrat caucus will be the most radical caucus ever, with the exception of a few red state Dems who will be forced to either switch parties or vote with us.

Another important point to consider is that we are now slated to control redistricting in almost every important state (we will post more regarding Governors and state legislatures later).  Also, more red states will receive extra seats and more blue states will lose seats under reapportionment.  These majorities will be permanent and will expand, even if we fail to make inroads into blue districts (which unfortunately seems to be the prognosis after last night's disappointment in these areas).

Here are some interesting numbers concerning the House

The Political Dynamic in the Senate is Much Better than it Appears

After the completion of an election with a record amount of competitive state and federal races, it is often hard to sift through the rubble and ascertain the true meaning of the results. Many of us are a bit disappointed with the results on the Senate side. I'll be doing a comprehensive analysis of the House, Gubernatorial, state legislature, and other statewide races in a later post. For now I wanted to tackle the bad news first. In reality, I think there is a lot to look forward to in the Senate in the long run.


Let's start with the worst news of the night; the Senate results. There is no doubt that the loss of such a great conservative as Sharon Angle is devastating. The fact that instead of a tea party patriot representing Nevada, we will still have Harry Reid is quite nauseating. This was by far the worst news of the night. Other bad news was Joe Miller, Carly Fiorina, and possibly even Ken Buck (we will have to see what sort of cheating occurs in Washington and Colorado). But here are some important things to consider:

• We will still have at least 47 Republican Senators, and maybe even 48 or 49 when all the votes are counted. This will present the Democrats with a challenge of governing a totally unworkable majority. So they will hold the responsibility of governing (thus taking away one of Obama's selling points for 2012), but will have very little power.

• Many people have lost sight of how many good conservatives we have gained in the Senate. Instead of Blanch Lincoln in Arkansas we have John Boozman. We also have Pat Toomey, Rand Paul, Ron Johnson, John Hoeven, and Dan Coats (instead of pseudo-moderate Evan Bayh). Also, let's not overlook the fact that we have turned so many incumbent R seats to the right. Instead of a RINO in Florida, we now have Marco Rubio. In Kansas, Jerry Moran is replacing La Raza Senator Brownback. Roy Blunt is not a tea partier, but he has a better voting record than outgoing Senator Kit Bond. Kelly Ayotte is much better than Judd Gregg in New Hampshire. Rob Portman in Ohio is almost tantamount to a pickup because Voinovich was an absolute RINO. Mike Lee is replacing Bob Bennett. So in reality, we have really moved at least 12 seats to the right (not including potential wins by Rossi and Buck).

Late Night Upsets

Ok, well things are looking to be very close to the way both the Senate and House polls were predicting. I'll have a full roundup and analysis of all the House races as well as some of the state legislature, Attorney General, and other statewide races tomorrow. For now, here are two potential upsets.

IL-8: With almost 90% reporting Republican Joe Walsh is virtually tied with Democrat Congresswomen Mellisa Bean.

TX-27: With 87% reporting Republican Blake Farenthold in running closely ahead of progressive leader Solomon Ortiz.

We'll see if they pull it out.

Making Sense of the Pre-Election Chaos

As we head into the final hours of the 2010 elections, there have been conflicting indications as to where we are headed on election night.  Here are some things to consider:

- Although tomorrow night will undoubtedly be a good night for us, the election is still very volatile and there is a wide disparity in terms of possible outcomes.  The election results could be similar to 1994 in which we picked up 8 Senate and 52 House seats.  On the other hand, it could be a super wave that could lead to a Senate majority, as well as up to 100 more seats in the House.  We therefore cannot rest until the polls close.  Call all your friends and family and make sure they vote Republican.

- Part of the reason why there is still so much uncertainty is because of the dichotomy between the macro polling and the individual state polling.  Let's put it bluntly.  Both the 15 point Gallup generic ballot lead and the state Senate polls cannot be true.  If the Republicans really lead by such a margin on the generic ballot polling, then there is no way that they are in such tight races in California, West Virginia, Washington, and Colorado.  If the generic macro polling data that gives the GOP a 30 point lead among independents and a 6 point lead among women is really accurate, then all those races are going in our direction.  In fact, the battle lines would move as far as to place Delaware and Connecticut in play.  Conversely, if the state polling is correct, then there is no way that the macro polling is accurate.

-  Turnout Models: This is connected to the previous point.  Most of the state polling that shows the GOP wave stalling in some Senate and Gov. races predict a turnout model similar to that of 2006.  Even Rasmussen has been doing this.  Their most recent Washington poll which has Rossi up 1, is pegged exactly to the 2006 party ID numbers.  The most recent Survey USA poll which had Boxer up by 8, assumed a more favorable Democrat turnout than in 2006.  This could provide us with a resolution to the contradiction between the state and macro polling data.  If we are to assume that the macro polling numbers (generic ballot, demographics, enthusiasm, etc.) are correct, then we have to add at least 5 points to every Senate race poll to account for the more favorable turnout models.  Nate Silver argues that this is one of the reasons why the wave can be even bigger than expected.

- House Polls: The House wave keeps growing even as we speak.  If the Republicans would just win the R rated districts, they would pick up 70 seats.  Yet, there are dozens more incumbents in deep D territory that are seriously vulnerable, and some are certain to go down.  All of the polling data confirms this.  Just today, there was a poll out of CT-5 in which Republican Sam Caliguiri was up 9 points in a D+2 district!  If this is true, there is no way that we aren't doing better in the Senate races.  Again, there is something flawed in the turnout models of these polls.

The Juggernaut of the Democrat and Media Smear Machine

Several astute political observers have begun to notice the growing dichotomy between the state of the House races and the Senate races.  While the conservative wave has continued to build in the House, it has stalled and even faltered in statewide races.  More house polls continue to show incumbent liberals in deep blue territory to be vulnerable.  However, on the Senate front (and in a few Gubernatorial races), we have lost ground throughout October.  

Our momentum has stalled in Colorado and Illinois, and the Democrats were even beginning to make a comeback in Kentucky and Pennsylvania (those races are now looking better).  In addition, Connecticut and Delaware seem to be lost, while California and Washington are looking tough.  Joe Manchin has successfully lied to West Virginians about his liberalism and is looking pretty competitive.  The question is, how are the Democrats successfully competing in some of these races while there is record unemployment and economic malaise?  The answer is quite simple; it’s the Democrat/media smear machine, of course!

The Senatorial and Gubernatorial races that the Democrats have been competitive in during the past month directly correspond with the candidates whom they have most successfully smeared. Despite the tidal wave of anger against the Democrats, and the decline of America as a result of their policies, the liberals have successfully isolated some statewide races and dragged down their Republican opponents based upon frivolous allegations, lies, and distractions. Evidently, the smears and lies about Meg Whitman’s cleaning lady, John Raese’s wife, Ken Buck’s statements, Joe Miller’s past, and Rand Paul’s college years, are more important than the state of the economy and the future of the nation. Together with their buddies in the media, liberals and rinos (in the case of Murkowski) have been able to succeed (at least to some degree) in their time tested use of politics of personal destruction, even in the most unfavorable political climate for Democrats in many years. What does this say about many voters in this country?

Things looking Good in Washington

The news that Dinno Rossi is up 48%-47% in latest Rasmussen poll provides us with some hope of taking back the Senate.  Incidentally, the news might be even better than the poll numbers would suggest.  First, the latest approval numbers show Rossi with a +5 approval rating and Murray with a -2 rating.  This is one of the best approval ratings out of the Republican candidates who have been behind their opponents for most of the election.

There is also another very important factor to consider.  Rasmussen's party ID breakdown of 39 D 29R and 32 I is identical to the turnout of the 2006 election.  That was the worst election for us since Watergate, while  2010 might be the best since 1894.  Nobody knows the exact turnout model for this election, but if it is anything close to what Gallup is predicting, we will win all of the Senate races in which the Republican is even or even slightly behind in the polls on election day.

CA-Sen: Another Day, Another Bogus Poll from PPP

It's amazing how the media reports polling from PPP without mentioning that it is a Democrat polling firm.  We have previously pointed out how they over sample Democrats.  Well, they were at it again this week in California where they came out with a poll that had Boxer over Fiorina 52-43, and Brown over Whitman 53-42.  The problem is that their sample was more unfavorable to Republicans than the 2006 turnout.  2006 was the worst year for the GOP since Watergate and there were no significant Republican candidates on the ballot to turn out the Republican base.  Yet, we are to believe that not only will turnout be at least as good as 2004, it will be worse than 2006.

The 2006 exit poll data from California showed the following partisan turnout:  41% D, 35% R, 25% I.  The PPP poll shows a partisan breakdown of 47% D, 34% R, 19% I.  Also, in 2006, women constituted 51% of the electorate, while they represent 53% in the PPP survey.  Does anyone really believe that turnout models will be worse than in 2006?

Also, the latest Suffolk University poll is even worse.  They also have Boxer leading 52-43, but their survey sample includes 45% D, 31% R, and 25% I.  It is important to discount any Suffolk poll for the rest of the election season because of their ridiculously callous way of screening for likely voters.  Sean Trende, at RCP has a good write-up on this point.

NY-9 Bob Turner for Congress, Another Sleeper?

Over the past few weeks, we have tried to highlight some potential sleeper races.  (The full list can be found here)  In our continuing campaign to swing for the fences and leave nothing on the table we now move to New York's 9th district.  This district covers parts of southern Brooklyn and Queens, but it is surprisingly rated only D+5, the most favorable of any NYC district besides for Staten Island (NY-13).  NY-4, Carolyn McCarthy's seat is rated D+6 and is already on our radar.  You can donate to her opponenet, Fran Becker, here.

NY-9 has been misrepresented by Anthony Weiner since 1998.  Although this is a Democrat district, Weiner is much too radical for his constituents and is ripe for defeat.  Obama only won this district by 10%.  His opponent, Bob Turner, has raised $340,000 dollars.  That's more than some other challengers in sleeper districts.  There is no reason why Weiner should get a free ride.  Bob Turner is an Army veteran who has fought for this country.  Let's help Bob Turner fight for us again and send Anthony Weiner packing. 

Md-42: Jim Brochin is a Liberal Manipulator and Is Ripe for Defeat

We have observed the widespread misinformation disseminated by so-called "Blue Dog Democrats" this election season concerning their political ideology.  People like Frank Kratovil vote with the Democrats, are funded by Democrats and outside leftist organizations, and enable the election of their liberal leadership, yet, they manipulate their voting record in order to call themselves independents or conservatives.  Well, Democrat state legislators who reside in swing-conservative districts are no different.

For the past eight year, state Sen. Jim Brochin (D-MD-42) has knocked on every door in Pikesville and Towson and lied to his constituents about his political allegiance.  He tells everyone what they want to hear.  Most of his constituents are moderate or conservative so he tells everyone that he is a fiscal conservative.  On his website, he makes no mention of his party affiliation, calling himself a "proven independent".  Here are some things that Baltimore County voters need to consider:

More Liberal Polls?

Normally, when one wishes to alter reality, they do so in a way that won't obviously expose their charade.  However, when it comes to left wing media outlets conducting polls, they are so committed to electing Democrats that they don't care how ridiculously they are perceived.  There were two great examples over the weekend.

Maryland Gubernatorial Race

The Baltimore Sun published a poll that was posted on their front page showing Martin O'Malley leading Bob Ehrlich by 14 points!  Folks, you can't make this stuff up.  The Baltimore Sun has had a visceral hatred for Ehrlich for eight years and has done everything in their power to sabotage his campaign.  Now, they come out with a totally fabricated poll so they can provide O'Malley with some false momentum and dry up Ehrlich's fundraising base.  Gonzales Research, the only respected independent polling outfit in Maryland, had O'Malley leading by 5 during that same period.  The Sun provides no information about their sample other than this:

Which Blue Dogs Might Switch Parties?

In an ideal world, there would not be a single blue dog left in congress on November 3rd.  All of them reside in strong or lean GOP districts and in a year when congress critters like John Dingell and Barney Frank are in trouble, one would assume that all the blue dogs would be long gone.  Unfortunately, there are a few districts that will retain some of their blue dog frauds unless there is a drastic change over the next 11 days.  In some of these districts the Republican candidate never gained traction, while in others, the blue dog was successful in lying to his constituents by painting himself as more conservative than his Republican challenger.

However, the real question is this:  If the Republicans are slated to gain full control over the House, will any of these guys switch parties (two D's flipped following the 94 wave)?  Let's be clear, I have no illusions that any of these foxhole conversions would be sincere.  Quite the contrary, everything that these blue dogs do are designed to perpetuate their power in the most effective way.  This is why I wouldn't be surprised if some of these Pelosi lapdogs would bail on their master to join the winning team.  Here is a list of Dems who appear to be holding on to their seats and might switch parties.

ID-1 R+18: Walt Minnick 
NC-11 R+6: Heath Schuler
OK-2 R+14: Dan Boren
PA-4 R+6: Jason Altmire
UT-2 R+15: Jim Matheson
VA-9 R+11: Rick Boucher

Handicapping Those Vital Sec. of State Races Across the Nation

Forget about the House and Senate, the most important races throughout the country are the ones for Secretary of State!  OK, that might be a bit of an exaggeration, but these races are much more important than most people think.  Last week, we posted an optimistic analysis of the state Attorney General races.  I would argue that in light of all the Democrat cheating and early voting laws, the races for Secretary of State are almost as important.  If we are to ensure that our elections are to be free and fair, we must win as many of these races as possible.

George Soros realized the value these offices have in stealing elections, so he created a new 527, the Secretary of State Project (which is funded by his "Democracy Alliance") to focus on these election while nobody was paying attention.  During the past two election cycles, Soros successfully installed like-minded radicals as SOS in Ohio, Minnesota, Iowa, Montana, Missouri, West Virginia, Nevada, New Mexico, and Oregon.  His most prominent coup was in Minnesota, where he helped elect Mark Ritchie, the man who helped Al Franken turn an election night vote deficit into a surplus.

We cannot be complacent and make the same mistake this year.  If we let Soros take over these vital positions, our electoral victories will be meaningless.  As Soros's hero Joseph Stalin once said,  "The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything." Let's take a look at the electoral landscape of the Sec. of State races.

Every state has a Sec.of State, except for Alaska, Hawaii, and Utah, in which the Lt. Governor performs most of those duties.  35 of the 47 offices are popularly elected, while the remaining 12 are appointed by the Governor, State Legislature, or state courts.  Thanks to Soros, there are currently 27 Democrats, 19 Republicans, and one Independent (in New Hampshire).  26 of the 35 elected SOS's are up for election; 15 Democrats and 11 Republicans.  Of the 11 Republicans, there is nobody who is particularly vulnerable given the geographical landscape and the political environment.  However, there are a few races that we need to keep an eye on.  There are at least eight Democrat offices that we can conceivably flip.  In addition, there are several incumbent Democrats from states where the Governor or state legislature selects the SOS.  We have a good chance of picking up state houses and legislatures in those states and by extension, SOS offices.  Here is a list of the most important ones to watch. 

Let's Not Repeat the Vicious Cycle of '94-'06 Again

OK.  Let's say we wake up the morning of November third and discover that Dick Morris was correct in his bold predictions.  The Republicans take back the Senate and not only win the House, but garner a historic mandate of 260-270 seats.  The electoral battlefield is riddled with the dead carcasses of socialist giants like Barbara Boxer, Dingy Reid, Patty Murray, Russ Feingold, Lisa Murkowski, Charlie Crist, and scores of others. In addition, we pick up a dozen governorships and state legislature chambers in key battleground states that provides us with an unprecedented opportunity to control the redistricting process.  This places the Republican Party in a strong position to maintain their control over key house seats and have the upper hand over the battleground states during the Presidential election of 2012.

However, after the dust settles from the election,the million dollar question will be, then what?  How do we turn a Republican victory into a conservative triumph?  How do we ensure that it will be the DeMints, Millers, Bucks, and other tea party members in the House who will control the legislative process and the ensuing political narrative, and not the antiquated RINO dinosaurs of the land of Mitch McConnell?  How do we ensure that we don't repeat the same disastrous cycle of '94-'06, when the Republican brand tarnished the value of conservatism and set us up for the socialist takeover of the radical left?

One of the few tangible benefits of taking control of the Senate without obtaining 60 seats is the right to control the confirmation process of Supreme Court nominees.  It is very likely that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg will retire before Obama gets canned in 2012 and many would argue that Republican control of the Senate would ensure that we won't get another Elana Kagen.  The problem with that optimistic prediction is that we won't have anywhere near 51 votes against any nominee whom Obama picks.  In fact, aside for the plethora of RINOs in the Senate who will vote to confirm anyone, even a conservative like Pat Toomey expressed his principled support for any qualified nominee, irrespective of their perverted jurisprudence.  Also, we can't count on blocking a nominee in the Judiciary Committee (even one that is run by Jeff Sessions) because of Lindsey Graham.  So again, if nothing is done to hold their feet to the fire, how would a Republican-held Senate benefit us once we already have control of the House?

Updating That List of Sleeper Races

Last Week, we compiled a list of potential sleeper races while expressing the need to swing for the fences so we don't leave any seat behind.  Based upon some news report this week, I would ad these few districts.  Anyone who lives in these districts may want to send some $$$ to these donkey tormentors.

MD-2: Dutch Ruppersberger (D+7)- Donate to Marcelo Cardarelli here
MD-5: Steny Hoyer (D+7)- Donate to Charles Lollar here
MI-5: Dale Kildee (D+7)- Donate to John Kupiec here
OH-10: Dennis Kucinich (D+8)- Donate to Peter Corrigan here

Here is the original list of sleeper races:

AZ-7: D+6 Raul Grijalva is being challenged by Ruth McClung
CA-51 D+8 Bob Filner is being challenged by Nick Popaditch
CT-2:  D+6 Joe Courtney is being challenged by Janet Peckinpaugh
MA-4: D+14 Barney Frank is being challenged by Sean Bielat
MA-5: D+8 Niki Tsongas is being challenged by Jon Golnik
MA-6 D+7 John Tierney is being challenged by Bill Hudak
ME-1 D+8 Chellie Pingree is being challeneged by Dean Scontras
ME-2 D+3 Michael Michaud is being challenged by Jason Levesque
MN-7 R+5 Colin Peterson is being challenged by Lee Byberg
MN-8: D+3 Jim Oberstar is being challenged by Chip Cravaack
MO-3 D+7 Russ Carnahan is being challenged by Ed Martin
NC-4 D+8 David Price is being challenged by BJ Lawson
NC-13 D+5 Brad Miller is being challenged by Bill Randall
NJ-6 D+8  Frank Pallone is being challenged by Anna Little 
NM-3: D+7 Ben Ray Lujan is being challenged by Tim Mullins
NY-2: D+4 Steve Israel is being challenged by John Gomez
NY-4: D+6 Carolyn McCarthy is being challenged by Fran Becker
NY-9: D+5 Anthony Weiner is being challenged by Bob Turner
NY-22 D+6 Maurice Hinchey is being challenged by George Phillips
NY-27 D+4 Brian Higgins is being challenged by Lenny Roberto
OR-4   D+2 Peter DeFazio is being challenged by Art Robinson
PA-13 D+7 Allyson Schwartz is being challenged by Dee Dee Adock
TN-5  D+3 Jim Cooper is being challenged by David Hall 
TX-25 D+6 Lloyd Doggett is being challenged by Donna Campbell 
TX-27: R+2 Salomon Ortiz is being challenged by  Blake Farenthold
TX-28 R+0 Henry Cuellar is being challenged by Bryan Underwood
TX-29 D+8 Gene Greene is being challenged by Roy Morales

Maryland Democrats Trying to Steal Elections With Early Voting

Most conservatives have long felt that early voting is unconstitutional.  The cornerstone of our democracy provides for free and fair elections.  The most basic execution of a fair election is to conduct competing campaigns and then provide for one day at the end of the campaign in which the voters cast their verdict on the race.  Ever since the Democrats began implementing early voting, a huge percentage of votes are cast 2-3 weeks before the election campaigns are finished.  So there is no uniform standard to which the candidates are judged as different people are voting at varying times, with different information concerning the election.

There is also another problem with early voting; cheating.  And we all know that this is the main reason why the Democrats have pushed for it so aggressively.  After all, in almost every state, the early votes overwhelmingly favor the Democrats.  One opportunity they use to skew elections is by releasing early voting results before the first vote is cast on the real constitutional election day.  This is exactly what they intend to do in Maryland.  The Baltimore Sun reports:

With the state's first attempt at early voting in a general election set to begin Friday, officials still are working out kinks in the system.  After a trial run in last month's primaries, lawmakers are considering allowing those votes to be counted earlier on Election Day — an idea that has raised red flags among Republican and policy groups concerned that politicians could take advantage of the information.  Even with historically low turnout for the primaries Sept. 14, election judges were overwhelmed with work that night, prompting results from some of the larger areas to trickle in at a slower-than-usual pace.  To speed the process, State Elections Administrator Linda H. Lamone has drafted new rules for when early votes can be counted. For the primaries, the regulations allowed election judges to begin counting at 2 p.m.; under Lamone's draft, they could start counting at any time on Election Day — theoretically, right after midnight.

Liberals Lament: Voter Registration Declines

The world of community organizers and the left have long advocated for expanding voter registration.  There are primarily two reasons for this liberal fetish. 1. The more voters they can register, the more they can use to cheat. 2. People who are not engaged in politics enough to even register to vote, tend to be drones who are susceptible to absorbing the liberal lies hook, line, and sinker.  Now, the liberals at the Washington Independent are wringing their hands over declining voter registration.  Here is their report:

"Registration patterns vary significantly from state to state, but 26.7 percent fewer new voters have registered in Florida this year than in 2006, along with 21.4 percent fewer in Maryland and 16.9 percent fewer in Tennessee, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, a public policy and law institute at New York University. And while there’s no single cause for the decline, experts point out that many independent organizations are withering under a combination of public attacks by conservative activists alleging voter fraud and new state laws making it difficult for such groups to operate. “A four-year wave of attacks on voter registration drives, both in terms of state laws that either shut down voter registration drives or made it too onerous to do it, and other public attacks have certainly had an effect,” said Wendy Weiser, director of the Brennan Center’s Voting Rights and Elections Project."

So they are crying about the fact that we are actually implementing laws that prevent voter fraud and are prosecuting those community organizers who engage in it!  If anything, this is the best news that I have seen all cycle long.  Incidentally, the three states that are mentioned in this article, Florida, Maryland, and Tennessee, all experienced record low Democrat turnout in the primaries.  For conservatives, this means less fraud, less manipulation of the electoral process, less drones, and less power to the Cocktail Party and Food Stamp Party coalition.  Here is the complete report from the Brennen Center for Justice.  Let's just hope that they are correct and ACORN hasn't successfully operated under the radar during this election cycle.

Republicans Poised to Pick Up state Attorney General Offices

A lot of ink has been spilled trying to handicap the House, Senate, and Gubernatorial elections.  One of the important things about a wave election is that it usually has a down the ticket affect in boosting the victorious party in state legislature and other statewide elections.  I figured that I would begin today by researching where things stand in the race to control the state's attorney general offices.  In the coming days we will focus on the races for control of state legislatures and offices of Secretary of State. 

While these elections are not quite as important as the congressional races, the positive news concerning the lawsuit against ObamaCare illustrates the vitality of this position.  Just observe how Virginia AG Ken Cuccinelli is taking on the left on such issues as ObamaCare, global warming, and immigration.  These issues in particular will be fought primarily in the states over the next few years and it is imperative that we gain control of as many AG offices as possible.  Furthermore, these positions serve as great breeding grounds for future farm teams of conservatives who will be able to run for higher office.

Currently, 32 of the 50 state AG's are Democrats.  That needs to change and hopefully it will.  This cycle, there are 30 AG's up for election (a few others are appointed by the Governor) and the Democrats are defending 19.  Based upon other statewide polling and the prominence of the challengers, it appears that the GOP is in good position to hold all of 11 offices that they are defending, but the Democrats are facing the possibility of losing a bunch of their incumbents.  Here are some of the Dem seats that we might win:

Latest Polling Update

The liberal media is elated at the latest CNN/Time poll which shows Patty Murray leading Dino Rossi 51-43 in Washington.  But wait... before everyone gets all wee-weed up over the latest shocking poll, let's remember that this same polling outfit had Murray up 53-44 a month ago.  So there is basically nothing new.  CNN along with the Elway poll has consistently had Murray up by unrealistic margins that neither campaign believes.

Here is another crazy result from this poll.  While it shows Murray leading by 8 among likely voters, Murray is leading Rossi by just 4 among registered voters.  In the polling field, that is the equivalent of saying 4+4=6.

In other good polling news, Pat Toomey has grown his lead by 49-39% according to the latest Rasmussen poll out today.  Also, in Nevada, Angle has maintained her 48-46% lead in the latest LVRJ/Mason-Dixon poll.

PA looks to be in the bag.  The biggest races we need to focus on are Washington and Nevada.  Illinois is also just as close but the truth is I would much rather fight for Rossi and Angle over Mark Kirk.  He is the only Senate candidate who I am not sending any money.

Obama and O'Malley are Hurting the Poor in Md by Shutting Down Nuclear Power

 Recently, there have been several pieces in the Baltimore Sun concerning the news that Constellation Energy is pulling out of their project to build a third nuclear reactor at Calvert Cliff's in Calvert County.  They currently have two reactors in this rural county on the west shore of the Chesapeake Bay, and have been trying to secure a permit and federal loan for the proposed third reactor since 2007.  The government originally promised Constellation a $7.6 billion loan, but Obama's anti-nuclear power, Nuclear Regulatory Agency is demanding an $880 million fee to proceed on the deal.  These federal loans are absolutely vital to any construction of nuclear facilities to shield the contractors from costly legal battles with the eco-socialists.  However, the demand by the Obama administration for an extra fee has put a halt to any plans to proceed with the project.  Even though Gov. Martin O'Malley supports Obama's no growth, regressive, anti-nuclear policies, the Baltimore Sun is portraying him as the savior of the project.  They report:

"O'Malley is one of several state and local officials who hope to keep the project alive and save thousands of jobs to build and operate the $9.6 billion reactor in Southern Maryland."

So, Will You Vote for Nancy Pelosi?

In light of all the recent news about Democrat candidates running as John Birchers, I felt is was finally time to call their bluff.  We are in a very good position to take back the House, but there is some polling evidence that some of the red district blue dog frauds are still hanging in there.  Keep in mind that there are 70 Dems in R rated districts.  A handful of them are doing relatively well because they try to block out their party label, run against the liberal platform, attack their Republican opponent from the right, or tout endorsements from the NRA and Chamber of Commerce.

I think we need to start a campaign to call the offices of these clowns and demand that they go on record whether they would vote for Pelosi or Hoyer to be Speaker.  Incumbent Bobby Bright (AL-2) and candidate Roy Herron (TN-8) were the only ones to go on record as opposing Nancy Pelosi.  Now, don't get me wrong.  Even guys like Bright and Herron are frauds because if they really supported their convictions they wouldn't join and bolster a party that negates those very convictions that they purport to hold dear.  We are sick of these frauds who trash Pelosi at home, but then vote for the liberal leadership, committee chairmen, and Democrat Rules Committee members who ensure passage of all the legislation that they claim to detest.  However, if we can get them on  record as declining to take a stand (that's what most will do) we can help their opponents expose their fraudulent claims of being conservative.  If we play our cards right, there shouldn't be a single Democrat in a Republican district after November.

Here is a list of Democrats who are polling relatively strong and still need to be defeated.  Let's try to get a hold of their campaign offices and make them take a stand on Pelosi.  Then, contact your local newspaper or TV/radio station.  I will start with mine in Maryland-1 Frank Kratovil.

Are Democrats Pretending to Switch Parties?

Throughout this election season, Democrats across the country are employing all sorts of tactics to shed their D label.  Some call themselves "independent" on their websites, others bash Pelosi and Reid, and some like Joe Manchin would make you believe that they are Sharon Angle or Rand Paul.  Now, NRO's Battle '10 reports that Congressman Gary Peters (MI-9) erroneously tagged his congressional website with the R label.  Here is their report:

"Rep. Gary Peters (D?, MI-09) is facing a tough reelection this year after being swept into office in the Obama wave of ‘08. But to what length is he willing to go to save his seat?

A routine Google search for “Gary Peters” brings up a link to his Congressional web site, under which the tag line reads “Official web site for Representative Gary Peters (R – MI).”
When BATTLE ‘10 contacted Rep. Peters’ office, a spokeswoman said Peters is in fact a Democrat, that they had just learned of the error today and are working to correct it. Curious."

I find this to be mighty suspicious given the timing and the fact that I don't recall this sort of mistake occurring before.  Anyway, let's help his opponent, Rocky Raczkowski remind Peters who he works for and votes with.  In fact, being that he might get canned in just three weeks, it might be worthwhile to leave the R tag line on his website.

What Other Sleeper House Races are Lurking in the Background?

Most of the professional pundits laughed at us last year when we declared there to be 70-80 seats that are easily in play.  Now, it has become yesterday's news.  The real news is that there are sleeper races that are emerging that weren't even factored into the top 100 list of endangered Democrats.  Much of the excitement has been surrounding the race in AZ-7 in which radical leftist Raul Grijalva finds himself trailing political neophyte Ruth McClung by two points in a poll conducted by Magellan Strategies.  This is a D+6 district, but Grijalva, the Chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, is way too radical even for a Democrat leaning district.  It turns out that his support for the boycott of his own state might spawn a boycott of his political career.

The question on everyone's mind is if Grijalva is vulnerable, what other supposed safe Democrats are ripe for defeat?  Well, incidentally, Charlie Cook just moved five more "Safe Democrats" to the "Likely Democrat" category.  Aside for AZ-7, the other four were MA-4, MN-8, NM-3, and TX-27.  Here is a list of the Republican candidates that can use an extra few bucks to put them over the top.

The Chamber's "Foreign" Funds are Preserving Obama's Majority

Last week, we compiled a list of Democrats who were endorsed by the NRA.  (It was posted on Red State here)  Some expressed surprise at how the NRA would negate their own interests by supporting Democrats in the vital districts that are needed for them to preserve their majority.  Well, the Chamber of Commerce in no different.  They are out endorsing liberal fraud, blue dog, Frank Kratovil over conservative Andy Harris in Maryland's 1st district.  The Chamber has contributed over $168,000 to Kratovil!

Meanwhile, throughout the weekend the Obama administration has been attacking the Chamber of Commerce and accusing them of being funded by foreign entities.  This is coming form an administration that took more money from foreign sources than any other campaign in American history, including from radical Islamists.  The irony is that the Chamber is funding Democrats reelections bids in some of the most vital districts that are necessary for Republicans to capture the House.  In fact, they are slated to spend $2 million dollars for Blue Dog Democrats nationwide.  So, who are the ones who are benefiting from this alleged foreign entity after all?

Now, MD-1 is the quintessential red district that we must win in order to secure a majority.  However, according to the most recent poll, Andy Harris only lead Frank Kratovil by 43% to 40%.  An endorsement from the Chamber can go a long way in securing Kratovil's "conservative" credentials with his conservative constituents.  So by Obama's own admission, foreign money is helping to save his majority.

Update:  The LA Times mentions a few more blue dogs that are receiving support from the Chamber.  They are scheduled to run ads in almost a dozen of these districts over the next few weeks.

Weekly Md Roundup: A Glimmer of Hope Amidst the Darkness

- Much of the political news in Maryland has been focused upon the negative polling data for Bob Ehrlich over the past two weeks.  I think that Ehrlich made a tactical mistake by letting O'Malley go up on the air unanswered for several months in the Baltimore market and several weeks in the DC market.  Hopefully, now that he is hitting O'Malley for covering up negative economic reports, things will begin to shift.

- There were a few positive news items in Maryland this week.  The Carrol County Times reports that Republicans have increased their registration numbers while Democrats have lost several hundred voters.  This might seem insignificant as Carrol County is already a very "red" jurisdiction.  On the other hand, if we would only shore up our support in the conservative parts of the state, we would go a long way in making this a two party state.  A few months ago, there was a report in the Baltimore Sun about Republicans making registration gains in Harford County, another growing red county in Maryland.  The GOP has failed for many years to harness the conservative energy that already exists in much of the state.  There is still a lot of improvement to be made even in the counties that are already considered "in the bag" for Republicans.

- Gonzales Research and Marketing Strategies (a respected local polling firm) conducted a poll of the Howard County Executive race and found Democrat incumbent Ken Ulman leading Republican Trent Kittleman by just 49-41.  This is more important than it appears on the surface because Howard County is the 4th most liberal jurisdiction in Maryland, just behind Baltimore City, Montgomery, and Prince George's Counties.  Also, Howard has 30,000 more registered Democrats than Republicans, and in addition to the county executive's job, Democrats hold four of five County Council seats and eight of 11 General Assembly seats in Howard.  Ulman is a popular incumbent, and incumbent Democrat County Executives are never seriously threatened in Maryland. 

The One Sided Debate Over the Weather

It's amazing how certain weather phenomenon seem to automatically "prove" Anthropogenic Global Warming, yet the counter-occurrence of those weather conditions are of no interests to the climate fascist lobby. Every year since the record hurricane season of 2005 the liberals have been predicting impending doom from the Atlantic hurricanes as a result of global warming (or climate change, as they now conveniently say). Max Mayfield, who was the director of the National Hurricane Center and is widely regarded as the hero of the 2005 season (for his accurate predictions), was forced to step down in 2006 after he expressed doubt about the permanent presence of active hurricane seasons. Well, as it turns out, the past five years have been uneventful, while several of them have been completely docile. After predicting dire devastation from this year's semi active season, there was virtually no major disruption as a result of hurricanes. So, does this prove global cooling?

Here is another case in point. When several major US cities set record high temperatures over the summer, the eco-socialists were out peddling their myth of global warming like never before. Now that Polish scientists are predicting the coldest winter in Europe in over one thousand years, nobody is talking about global cooling. Hey, if it is really true that industrialization permanently changes the weather, then they better start cranking out that productivity in Europe before the onset of the winter! Then again, they already shut down so much energy production due to global warming that when we experience a period of cooling, many who can't afford the high cost of eco-socialism will be left to shiver.

Update:  Drudge is now reporting an article that claims that California greenies lied about state pollution levels to pass their cap and trade laws.

Another Liberal Poll, This Time from New Hampshire

If there is any semi competitive Senate race that everyone agrees the Republican will easily win, it is New Hampshire. In every recent poll, Republican Kelly Ayotte has held a large and growing lead over Democrat Paul Hodes. Well, the latest poll from American Research Group (ARG) has Hodes trailing Ayotte by just 5 points, 47%-42%. I found that result quite astounding in light of the recent polling data and especially as Republicans are polling much better than that in other states where they are running against incumbents. Then I took a look at the internal numbers and found this from their website:

"The following results are based on 600 completed telephone interviews among a statewide random sample of registered voters in New Hampshire likely to vote in the November 2, 2010 general election." Also, the partisan breakdown of that poll was 29% R, 31% D, 40% undeclared. That is almost exactly in line with the partisan turnout of 2008. Does anyone really believe that the 2010 turnout will be just as bad for the GOP as 2008, especially is a state that has swung further to the right over the past two years than almost any other?

We are going to see a lot more of these polls over the next few weeks percolating throughout the media as a ploy to gin up enthusiasm with the left wing kooks. I'm not worried about the Senate race, but the Governor's race is crucial for the 2012 Presidential election. Although Democrat Governor Stephen Lynch was not considered vulnerable, Republican John Stephen had pulled within two according to the most recent survey from Rasmussen. This ARG poll had Lynch leading Stephen 51-41. Then again, what good is a sample of registered voters in an election cycle like 2010.

12 Democrat Incumbents Are Behind in New Poll

The Hill just published the results of 12 House polls that they conducted together with America’s Natural Gas Alliance (ANGA).  The Republican challenger is ahead in 11 of them and tied with the Democrat in one district.  Over the next few weeks the Hill will publish poll results in 42 districts.  The survey size is 400 per district with a 4.9% margin of error.  Oh, and by the way, the poll team is being led by Democrat consultant Mark Penn.  Here are the results:

AZ-1: Republican Paul Gosar leads Dem. Ann Kirkpatrick 46-39.
CO-4: Republican Cory Gardner leads Democrat Betsey Markey 44-41.
IL-11: Republican Adam Kinzinger leads Dem. Debbie Halvorson 49-31.
MD-1: Republican Andy Harris leads Dem Frank Kratovil 43-40.
MI-7: Republican Tim Walberg is tied with Dem Mark Schauer at 41.
NV-3: Republican Joe Heck leads Dem Dina Titus 47-44.
NM-2: Republican Steve Pearce leads Dem. Harry Teague 46-42.
OH-15: Republican Steve Stivers leas Dem. Mary Jo Kilroy 47-38.
OH-16: Republican Jim Renacci leads Dem. John Boccieri 42-39.
PA-3: Republican Mike Kelly leads Dem. Kathy Dahlkemper 49-36.
VA-2: Republican Scott Rigell leads Dem. Glenn Nye 42-36.
VA-5: Republican Robert Hurt leads Dem. Tom Periello 45-44

7 of these Democrats are endorsed by the NRA.  We reported yesterday on how they might preserve Pelosi's majority.  Based upon these polls we might be able to conclude that their endorsements don't mean that much after all.

Losing a Primary the Tea Party Way: A Study in Contrasts

Ovide Lamontagne, the tea party candidate who lost a close primary for Senate in New Hampshire, is speaking out today about the contrast between the way we lose and the way RINO's lose.  In his guest editorial for the American Thinker, Ovide confirms that he waived the right to a recount in his 1,600 vote loss to Kelly Ayotte for the purpose of party unity.  Even though he worked so hard and was outspend 6-1 by Ayotte, he declined to push forward because it was a late September primary and he knew that such a fiasco would only benefit the Democrat.  Lamontagne explains,

"My foremost concern is defeating Paul Hodes and his liberal agenda, and I feared that the delay in unifying our party would negatively affect our ability to win in November. Accordingly, when Kelly Ayotte was declared the primary winner in a very close race, I waived our right to a recount and committed my support to her campaign, asking my supporters to do the same."

The NRA is Helping Preserve the Anti Gun Democrat Majority

Believe it or not, the only ones who might help Nancy Pelosi save her House majority are those who run legislative affairs at the NRA.  So called Blue Dog Democrats across the nation are campaigning as red meat conservatives in their home districts, while running deceptive ads about their Republican opponents.  They campaign as if they have nothing to do with the Democrat Party that they propelled to power and which passed all of the nefarious legislation that they purport to oppose.  The sick irony is that the more successful these liars are in distancing themselves from Pelosi, the more likely it will be that Pelosi will remain Speaker.  Here is my previous report on the need to expose the blue dogs.  Also, check out the Club for Growth's excellent report on the lie of the conservative Democrat.

Fortunately, as long as the conservative rhetoric is coming from the Democrat candidates themselves, the voters aren't buying it.  However, when the NRA parachutes in and endorses that Democrat for reelection over their 2nd amendment champion Republican opponents, people might give credence to their claims of being born again conservatives.  The sad thing is that the NRA is endorsing Democrats in the very districts that we must win in order to obtain 39 seats.  Here is a list of some of the Democrats who the NRA is endorsing that could cost us the majority: 

Md-Senate:The Washington Post and Their Fraudulent Poll

Anyone who didn't believe that last week's Washington Post poll showing O'Malley leading Ehrlich 52-41 was pulled out of a cereal box is sure to admit it now.  They are out with the second half of their new poll of the Senate race which shows Barbara Mikulski leading Republican Eric Wargotz 61-29!  That's a 32 point margin!  Now, I admit that Wargotz doesn't have much of a chance to defeat Mikulski, but does anyone really believe that she will do better in 2010 than most years?  The last Rasmussen poll had Mikulski leading by just 16 points.  Then again, what do we care if the liberal media convinces themselves that they are ahead.

What Does a Liberal Poll Look Like?

As the liberal media descends into a state of panic over the impending doom of their political party, they will continue to publish polls with results that are not only unlikely, but impossible.  I was going to do an analysis of the crazy Washington Post poll that has O'Malley up 11 over Ehrlich, but I see that Red Maryland has sufficiently debunked those results already.  Instead we will move onto the latest Newsweek poll which has the Democrats up 5 in the generic ballot question among registered voters and 8 among definite voters.  Any poll which shows the Democrats doing so well at this point is suspect.  However, when it comes from a discredited news organization like Newsweek, it is pure fiction.

First, any poll that has the Democrats doing better among definite voters than registered voters is completely fabricated, irrespective of the specific numbers reported.  Second, as we reported earlier regarding the Kentucky Senate poll, you have to examine the party ID weightings.  Any poll that shows a more unfavorable model for the GOP than that of 2008 is completely bogus.  This Newsweek poll does exactly that.  They sample 39% D, 29% R, 32% I.  Even in the disastrous year of Obama in 2008 the turnout model was 39 D, 32 R, 29 I.  Then again, what would you expect from a publication that was purchased for one dollar!

Md-Gov: O'Malley Caught Lying About Economic Data

If anyone wants to know why we don't trust the wolves (government statists) to guard the hen house (our economic prosperity) look no farther than the O'Malley administration.  Martin O'Malley has been campaigning all over the state and lying to everyone about a non-existent economic recovery in Maryland.  As it turns out, O'Malley's Department of Labor, Licensing, and Regulation (DLLR) was hiding an internal report all along that showed that economic growth has "stalled."  One young staffer mistakenly posted the report on the DLLR website, but was told to immediately remove it before people would discover the truth about O'Malley's economic policies.  Fortunately, they were caught in the act.  The Washington Post Reports:

Ken Holt Shows Why He Should be Baltimore County Executive

Republican Ken Holt

My district in Baltimore County has been represented by arch-socialist snob, Kevin Kamenetz for 16 years.  Last night was the first time that I've heard someone finally take him to task for his lying about issues concerning taxation and spending, corruption, and corporate cronyism with local land developers.  The man who took him down was Republican Ken Holt.  Holt is challenging Kamenetz for what Democrats thought would be a coronation for County Executive.  Holt and Kamenetz debated last night on a new radio show on WCBM hosted by Jay Liner of "All Politics is Local".

You can listen to the full audio of the debate here.  (Courtesy of Bryan Sears of Patuxent Publishing Company)

Some of the highlights included Holt's dressing down of Kamenetz's 10 year lie about not raising property taxes in the county.  Holt pointed out that they raised the assessed property values so much that it is tantamount to a tax increase.  Also, when asked about an intangible quality that he posses over his opponent, Holt tersely replied, "Honesty".  One of my favorite moments was when Holt reminded Kamenetz that for his million dollars worth of ads he only received 40,000 votes.  (And according to the Gazette, a third of that came from early voting, of course.)  Towards the end of the debate, Holt admonished Kamenetz for his nasty and misleading primary campaign against fellow councilman Joe Bartenfelder.  To everyone's surprise, Bartenfelder called in and gave the following haunting retort to Kamenetz's promise to run a facts and issues based campaign:

“Kevin, buddy,.. If we're gonna have factual dialogue between now and the general [election], let’s make sure you stick with exactly what the facts are, buddy, OK?

“Because, you know, I wouldn't want any more of those misrepresented ads out there.”

KY-Senate: Don't Believe Every Poll You See

Here is an important piece of advice for those who are monitoring the 2010 election polling data on a daily basis.  Look at how the pollster breaks down the party identification.  The Survey USA poll of the Kentucky Senate race that was released this weekend should serve as a classic example of how erroneous party ID weightings can distort a survey.  After showing Rand Paul with a 15 point lead over leftist Jack Conway just three weeks ago, Survey USA now has Conway within two.  But here is the kicker.  The poll taken earlier this month had a party ID breakdown of 47 D 10 I 42 R.  That is actually slightly less favorable to the GOP than the disastrous 2008 turnout of 47 D 15 I 38 R (in which McCain still won).  Remember that there is no doubt that there will be more Republicans turning out to vote in Kentucky this year.  The only question is how much more?  However, nobody disputes that the turnout figures will be much more favorable than those of the past two elections cycles.

This brings me to the most recent Survey USA poll that shows Paul leading Conway by a paltry 49-47 margin.  The party ID weightings of the survey were as follows:  51 D 12 I 38 R!  Does anyone really believe that a majority of the voter turnout in a staunch conservative state, in a staunch conservative year, in a state where Obama's approval ratings are in the toilet, will be Democrats?  Is it really possible for voter turnout models in 2010 to be worse for the GOP than 2008?  I have no proof that Jack Conway is not on the rise, however if he is, it will not be as a result of an impossible voter turnout model.

Public Policy Polling (PPP) is a good case study of what a difference party ID weightings have on the survey results.  Towards the beginning of the cycle, they had polls that showed Senator Burr in North Carolina in a dead heat with his opponent.  This is because they had similar turnout models to the abovementioned Survey USA poll.  Now that they weight their surveys to reflect a more realistic turnout model for 2010, most of their polls are spelling doom for the Democrats.  The devil is always in the details.

Will the Conservative Wave Sweep Baltimore County?

We continue our focus on local elections as we highlight some key aspects of the elections in Baltimore County.

Baltimore County has one of the most diverse political constituencies of any jurisdiction in Maryland.  This growing county of 800,000 has a staunch conservative area in the north with some other pockets in the east and southwest.  There is a large black population on the west side which votes overwhelmingly Democrat.  There is a strong community of Reagan Democrats in the east, and an area of Jewish liberal Democrats in the northwest.  BC used to lean Republican, but in the past two decades there has been an influx of Democrat voters that has tipped the balance of power in local elections to the left.  The Democrats have held the position of County Executive for 16 years, and control 6 of the 7 seats on the council.  The Democrats also hold 14 of the 21 House seats, and 6 of the 8 Senate seats.

All early indications point to a positive year for the GOP in Baltimore County.  The question on the table today is if we can make it a sweep.  Despite the overwhelming Democrat registration edge in the county, BC is still a competitive area.  In fact, Ehrlich won Baltimore County by 22% in 2002, and even in 2006, when Republicans were decimated across the state and country, he still won by 3%.  There is no doubt that Ehrlich will perform much better this year, irrespective of whether he wins statewide.  This means that we have a historic opportunity to make vital gains during this year's midterms.  Here are some important races to watch:

John Barrasso (R-WY) for Republican Senate Conference Vice Chariman

As we approach the November elections we need to start contemplating our fight for control of GOP leadership posts.  After all, what good is a Republican Majority if it is lead by governing class statists?  Until recently most of the Senate leadership posts were held by non-conservatives.  McConnel is Minority Leader, Kyle is Whip, Lamar Alexander is Conference Chairman, and Murkowski was Conference Vice Chair.  Now that traitor Murkowski was forced out of her leadership position it is imperative that we replace her with a true conservative. 

Roll Call is reporting welcome news that John Barrasso will run for Conference Vice Chairman.  Barrasso is one of the few solid conservatives in the Senate and has the support of Tom Coburn for his leadership bid.  This is a good start, but we need to move our few conservatives into higher positions of leadership if our control of congress is to mean anything.

The RINOs Declared War on us Long Ago, It's Time We Reciprocate

The liberal Republicans were never on our side, and the events of this year only prove the obvious.  They are not moderates.  These government statists are  literally Republicans in name only.  They fundamentally agree with the Democrats on almost every core issue.  These are not the people that we can have an inclusive tent with, or any tent for that matter.

I used to be one of those pundits who saw value in RINO's on a very limited basis, in a situation "where the conservative cannot win".  The circumstances surrounding Arlen Specter, Bob Bennett, Charlie Crist, Bill McCollum, Lisa Murkowski, and Mike Castle, in conjunction with the lessons of the failed Republican congress of the Bush era, teaches us that there is no use for RINO's in the party.  Quite the contrary, they are more destructive to our image, messaging, and long term goals than the Democrats.  They score more points for the other team than the Dems would dream of on their own.

Then we waste millions of dollars on their reelection so they can officially become Democrats or run on another ticket to ensure that the Democrat wins.  While conservatives always unite to reelect these bums in the general election, the RINO vermin refuse to support the conservatives.  They are not Republicans at all, they are leftist ruling class people who will not part with their power.  We must defeat every one of them.