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.