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.