Don’t Be Surprised If Democrats Don’t Lose Big
Two wars that weren’t paid for.
Huge tax cuts for the rich that weren’t paid for.
TARP bailout that wasn’t paid for.
Medicare Part-D that wasn’t paid for.
Then they point and say, “Look at this huge deficit Obama created!”
For months now, the “fact” that Democrats “will lose big” this election has been repeated so frequently it has become a foregone conclusion. Democrats were “expected” to lose both the House and the Senate before Teanut favorite Christine O’Donnell beat out the “official” GOP Party candidate in Delaware. But the House? They are still predicting Republicans will retake the House, but they’re getting nervous.
Proof of this can be seen in the final push with some really offensive, insane, and more-Wingnutty-than-usual ads in the closing days before the election. (ADDENDUM: Robo-Call Tells Kansas Voters That They Need Proof Of Home Ownership To Vote ‘On Wednesday’) If Republicans really had this race sewed up like the pundits continue to insist, Republicans would be running more “positive” and “moderate” message ads that don’t turn off Independents. Instead, we’re seeing ads and hearing stories of just how extreme the Right will be if they take control of one or both Houses.
You might remember that “Fox ‘news‘ Sunday” spent half of their August 29th show bragging about the “enormous” Glenn Beck “Restoring Honor” rally in Washington D.C. the day before… a whopping 87,000 Teabaggers that Sarah Palin believed was “a million people”. Then when a labor group sponsored the “One Nation” rally on October 2nd, they spent another 15 minutes belittling the reported “175,000″ attendees… a number that even I find dubious. But when Jon Stewart’s “Rally to Restore Sanity” draws a crowd of 215,000, FnS went dark… NOT. ONE. WORD. Two and a half times the attendance of Beck’s “rally”, and suddenly there’s nothing to talk about. Hmmm. On “Meet the Press”, reporter Mark ”I check Drudge 15 times a day” Halperin dismissed the size of the “Restore Sanity” rally “due to the star power of Stewart and Colbert”… as if Beck, with the non-stop promotion of FoxSnooze behind him didn’t lend “star power” to his rally. And simple common-sense tells you “no one would of cared if Stewart & Colbert’s politics were not popular.”
As many of you know, I subject myself to “Fox news Sunday” every week. Yesterday, I heard Brit Hume make the case that Democrats are failures, but follow his logic:
Chastising his new buddy Juan Williams, Hume pointed out that “in 2006, when Democrats retook both houses of Congress, they promised to make things better”. “But things didn’t get better, they got worse”, said Hume haughtily. May I first point out Hume is acknowledging that things were bad before Democrats took control of Congress in 2006, just as things were starting to implode? Next, I’d point out that Bush did not veto a single spending bill after Democrats took control, so if Democrats passed anything “destructive” to the economy, they did so with Bush’s blessing. Next, I’d point out that Hume just made the case that switching control of Congress in a mid-term made things worse not better, which also makes the case AGAINST “switching horses in mid-stream”… a point the Republicans campaigned on HEAVILY during the ’06 mid-terms.
While the Media continues to describe an inevitable Republican takeover of the House and huge gains in the Senate, they all but ignore recent Democratic poll gains and the number of Republicans suddenly downplaying the size of their “inevitable victory”.
The Media continues to show poll results that claim BSC teanut candidate Sharron Angle is leading Harry Reid in Nevada by as much as 4 points, despite a plethora of Angle missteps in recent days, most notably her “anti-immigrant” ads, such as “The Wave”, showing scary young Mexican gang members getting mugshots and lurking along a chain link fence at night with flashlights sneaking across the border to get “us”… portrayed by white urbanites. When asked to defend her clearly racist ads, Angle tried to argue the ad could equally be depicting Canadians (no, I’m not kidding), while telling a room full of Hispanic students, “Some of you look Asian to me”, and that she herself was mistaken to be Asian once. When the local Channel 8 reporter asked her last week about “the two wars we are in”, her response: “The two wars we’re in right now is exactly what we’re in”. Uh huh. You got me there! Angle then goes on to complain about how Channel 8 chose to ask her a question (at the airport)… which the station found was necessary since she refused to grant them an interview. THEN Angle told the station that she “won’t answer any questions until AFTER she’s elected”. Could a person win an election any other year after making an assertion like that? Do you think Harry Reid could of gotten away with it? No, I’m sorry, but after offending just about every Latino voter in the state, making insipid comments like the above, while shutting out the Press… just WHO exactly will be voting for Angle? I know Harry Reid is unpopular, but gimme a break!
Then there is all the “pro-traditional-marriage” anti-gay rhetoric being launched on the Right that has not only driven away yet-another huge demographic, but even turns off many young Republican voters (like Meghan McCain, who has yet to figure out she is actually a Progressive). Will they be voting Republican this year (other than clueless Meghan)? Can the GOP win with “purely” (pun intended) the white cracker vote? Only if all the demographics they’ve offended stay home, and presently, the teanuts seem to be doing their damnedest to encourage minorities to come out in force against them.
As you may or may not know, cellphones are exempt from polling (for a myriad of reasons). I found a fascinating PEW report last week showing that excluding cellphones from polling skews polls in favor of Republicans by an average of more than +5 points! Yikes! The reason? Many younger voters… typically Obama voters… use cellphones as their primary phones now, and in many cases, are their ONLY phones. Whereas most people with landlines who are home in the evenings when most pollsters call, tend to be older voters who tend to vote Republican. Factor in cellphone using voters, and you flip about a dozen races in the Democrats favor. Bet you didn’t hear THAT on TV.
Harry Reid cited this fact with regards to polls showing him in a dead heat with Sharron Angle. If there is any race more affected by the “young vs old, minority vs white” divide in our culture today, it is the Reid/Angle race in Nevada.
Already, Republicans have started running false stories of “voter fraud” in anticipation of some surprise loses and/or less-than-dramatic gains Tuesday:
(ADDENDUM:) AZ Immigration Law Writer Running For Office In Kansas On Voter Fraud Platform – You name the type of voter fraud, Kris Kobach (R-KS) can produce PROOF that it’s taking place in Kansas this year… until some of the “dead” voters he claims voted came forward to discredit him.
And false stories are being spread, not just about imagined voter fraud, but the state of the economy prior to the election. So that AFTER the election, the improved numbers that are ALREADY starting to emerge, Republicans will try and take credit for. Not only crediting those Conservatives who were just elected, but crediting the “expectation that they were going to be elected in 2010″ for the “sudden” economic turn around:
Though still low, GDP grew by 2% last quarter, up from 1.7% the quarter before. And consumer spending rose to 2.6%… the best in four years.
Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS’ “One-Size-Fits-All” Ad Falsely Claims North Dakota’s Economy Is ‘Reeling’. ND Unemployment? 3.7%, lowest in the nation.
We need to “Repeal & Replace ‘ObamaCare’. But with what? Policies ALREADY IN ObamaCare.
People are starting to spend money again, which makes the economy grow. All this despite unprecedented obstruction by Republicans in Congress, completely contradicting what they claim are the “job killing” effects of Stimulus Spending and the passage of ObamaCare. Naturally, Republicans will claim jobs and the economy would do “even better IF ONLY” we enacted THEIR policies instead of the Democrats. We heard this once before during the 2000 presidential campaign, where candidate Bush dismissed record job/economic growth under President Clinton, opining “how much better” the economy could of been “if only we of had a Republican president in charge of the Republican Congress”. So we tried it and it was an abysmal failure. The Deficit exploded, companies started laying off tens of thousands in the wake of “the Recession President Clinton (and Republican Congress) supposedly handed George W. Bush.” BEFORE 9/11, unemployment had already hit a four year high, rising 0.4% in Bush’s first eight months as president with the same Republican Congress.
Think about this scenario: President Bush left the country in a deep recession losing hundreds of thousands of jobs each month. Unemployment on the rise following a massive bank bailout. A Democratic president comes in and the economy starts to turn around. Two years later, despite a measurable economic turn-around and a stock market that has climbed over 3,000 points in less than two years, Republicans make big gains in the mid-term elections and retake Congress. And after they do, we see nothing but gridlock, pointless investigations, and a shutdown of government that threatens to wreck the economy.
2010? No, 1992. That is EXACTLY what happened when Bill Clinton defeated George HW Bush, followed by “the Gingrich Revolution” two years later. We’ve been down this road before. We can’t allow history to repeat itself. Get out and vote folks! And bring a friend.
(special thanks to DemocraticUnderground blogger “onehandle” for the screenshots.)
|Please REGISTER to post comments or be notified by e-mail every time this Blog is updated! Firefox/IE7+ users can use RSS for a browser link that lists the latest posts!|