Tag Archives: Carly Fiorina

The 2010 Midterm Elections Will Be Worse For Dems Than Expected

"Republican Party Elephant" logo


Bookmark and Share    This November is going to be quite a dramatic reversal of fortunes for Democrats and while some on the left are trying to claim that the Republican hopes for retaking the House are unwarranted and deny that we are in a wave election, there is actually no realistic basis for such claims. The surging force behind Republicans in 2010 is undeniable.   As indicated by Gallup, the Republican Party is polling incredibly well among voters on a number of factors including  party identification, voter preferences among independents, and even candidate preferences, and the G.O.P. has also retaken the lead on the generic ballot.

Furthermore; Republicans are now either comparable with, or surpassing Democrats on everything from voter enthusiasm and an increased online presence, to fundraising and a growing number of boots on the ground, grass root volunteers. For one of the first times in recent history, young Republican voters are expected to turn out in larger numbers than young Democrat voters. College Republicans have even jumped to a point in popularity and fundraising that is allowing them to go national with ads and target several key states on 2010.

When it comes to the large gap in internet presence and fundraising that existed between the left and right in 2008, in 2010 the trend has totally reversed. The first signs of this became evident 11 months ago when Scott Brown raised nearly $10 million online in all of 18 days. Now, we have seen other examples of internet success in such candidates as Sharron Angle and Christine O’Donnell who raised more than $1 million online in the 24 hours after their primary wins. All of this is a sign of two things. The G.O.P. has finally gained parity with the Democrats in the use of the internet and that the collective strength of the G.O.P.‘s grassroots is becoming increasingly more important than any strengths of particular candidates or their campaigns.

All of this points to a shifting of the political earththat is far greater than we saw in 1994.

Rarely has a political Party comeback as quickly as the Republican Party is poised to do this November. Normally, it takes much more than two years to bounce back from the type of  losses that they suffered first in 2006 and then again in 2008.

It is accurate to say though, that the climb back to power for the G.O.P. is based less on the voters goodwill towards Republicans and more on the ill will that they have come to feel towards Democrats. Which leads me to wonder about something.

 Between 2006 and 2010, neither Party seemed to be held in any great esteem, yet why was there not any great move to finally create that perennially promised, almighty, and perfect third Party that we always hear dissatisfied voters talk about?

Although there has so far been a strong ripple of anti-incumbent sentiment out there,  we did not see the rise of that much hoped for third Party alternative. We did however see a powerful anti-big government movement infiltrate the process and greatly influence the field of Republicans running in 2010.

I believe that this is all largely due to the efforts of the Democrat Party more than the Republican Party.

The Party in power has overreached the mandate they thought they had in 2008. They even misread their significant wins in 2008 and assumed that the nation was actually desirous of an aggressive big government agenda. But in fact, they weren’t. The reason for the 2008 victory, led by the top of Democrat ticket with Barack Obama, was a phenomenon similar to the one that is giving rise to the Republican resurgence of 2010. Voters were voting against the Party in power.

This is what happens when voters are dissatisfied. They seek change……..the very same theme that candidate Obama successfully banked on in ’08.

Another key to the Democrat victories of 2008 was the excitement over the novelty of the historic chance to elect the nation’s first partially black President.  And last but not least was the fact that the G.O.P. ran a weak nominee at the top ticket who failed to energize the base and failed to prove that republicanism under him, would be any different from the republicanism seen under G.W. Bush and the existing Republican leadership in Congress.

So change was born. But as we have come to see, the change that Democrats have run with, is not the change that Americans are satisfied with. As a result, the political pendulum is now swinging back in the opposite direction. But it is swinging with a vengeance. Between incredible Democrat overreach, and an explosion of exaggerated government growth, spending and deficit increases, Democrats have polarized the electorate far more than did the Republicans who after a few years in power, slowly but surely forgot their commitment to limited government and less spending.

But it is clear now that most Americans believe in the basic Republican ideology of less government, less taxes and less spending. That is why rather than seeing a surge for third Party candidacies, you have seen a rush towards cleaning out the Republican Party of those whom have drifted away from those principles and failed to stand up for them responsibly and consistently.

We are now seeing one of those rare occasions when a large majority of voters are actually pushing an ideology more than a candidate. That is what the TEA Party movement is all about. They are pushing a cause more than Party politics and as such they are helping to return the G.O.P. back to its true conservative roots by ridding it of so-called RINO’s.

But if the G.O.P. is to continue its rise back to power into 2012 and beyond, they will have to prove to the voters that some lessons have been learned. 

Given that President Obama will still be President on the morning after November 2, 2010, and that the Senate will likely still be in Democrat control, albeit with a new Majority Leader, the G.O.P. House will have to hold firm in rejecting any compromises that err on the side of increased spending, and increased government overreach.

This will prompt charges of being obstructionists and cries that attempt to describe Republicans as the “Party of no” by those on the left, but it is important to remember that those initiating such remarks are not likely to ever support Republicans anyway. But if the G.O.P. aggressively offers solid alternatives while rejecting the President’s, and the Senate’s big government, liberal agenda, people will maintain faith in the new face of the G.O.P. and that ‘Party of no” description will continue to fall on deaf ears.

When the G.O.P takes back the House, they will have to prove that they are actually ready to fight for the values that are providing them with the momentum that they currently have behind them. This will especially be the case in matters of spending and the budget, since the House, more so then the Senate controls the purse strings of the federal government.  If they flinch, and if they fail to keep their noses clean and deliver on their promised commitments, their will be little enthusiasm from the grassroots to maintain the level of support that they are currently placing behind the G.O.P..

Republicans will also have to remember a few things. First they must make sure that each issue is connected to government’s role in the everyday lives of Americans. They need to consistently demonstrate how big government is expanding its control over our personal lives but at the sake of properly dealing with its actual responsibilities such as providing a secure border and finally developing comprehensive immigration reform or balancing the federal  budget. And they must keep each of these messages simple. The same way Ronald Reagan did in both 1980 and 1984, as demonstrated in the following 1984 Reagan campaign campaign ad:


Keeping it simple brings it home and in 1984 Reagan brought it home with a sweep of 49 states to Mondale’s 1.

But before we get to presidential politics as it pertains to 2012, we have to establish the point from which the G.O.P. will start from after 2o10.  At the moment it looks like Republicans could far surpass the expectations of many in both the House and the Senate .

Based upon the circumstances that exist today and my own estimation of how things will play out in the individual landscapes of several hotly contested states, I see the senate tied at with 50 Republicans and the 48 Democrats plus the two left leaning Independents who caucus with the Democrats.  This includes Retaining seats in Alaska, Arizona, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Idaho,Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Utah while picking up seats in;

  • Arkansas   (John Boozman over Blanche Lincoln)
  • Colorado    (Ken Buck over Mike Bennet)
  • Illinois       (Mark Kirk over Alexi Giannoulias)
  • Indiana      (Dan Coats over Brad Ellsworth)
  • Nevada       (Susan Angle over Harry Reid)
  • North Dakota    (John Hoeven over Tracy Potter)
  • Pennsylvania     (Pat Toomey over Joe Sestak)
  • Washington     (Dino Rossi over Patty Murray)
  • Wisconsin      (Ron Johnson over Russ Feingold)

However; there are several possibilities which increase the likelihood of a Republican takeover of the Senate.

Any one of three races could keep Joe Biden from breaking any tie vote.  Delaware, West Virginia and/or California could very easily go Republican. 

With the surprise win by a rather large margin of Christine O’Donnell over heavily favored Mike Castle, it is not of the question to believe that under the existing anti-left atmosphere and prevailing momentum,  O’Donnell could pull off another surprise and take the seat away from the media annointed frontrunner Chris Coons.  But even more possible than a Republican upset in delaware are the possible ones that are in the making inCalifornia and surprisingly, West Virginia.

In West Virginia, popular Democrat incumbent Governor Joe Mancin was originally seen as a shoo-in. He is one of those truly rare relative moderate Democrats and as a long serving Governor of the state he has done well by its voters and bonded with them extensively. Especially after a string of mining disasters that hit this coal mining state pretty hard and very personally. But it would seem that winds of disenchantment with anything relating to Democrats are blowing so strongly against them that even Mancin’s personal relationship with voters is being severely curtailed when it comes to sending him to Washington, D.C.. For that reason, his Republican opponent John Raese went from nearly 33% at the end of July to 48% at the end of September while during that same time period, the popular Mancin went from 54% to 46% where he currently stands 2% behind underdog Raese.

The race is sure to be close and right now it can easily go either way but I believe the Republicans can pull this one off and at the moment I believe they will squeak it out.

In California, I can’t underestimate Barbara Boxer.

In her last race for the Senate, back in 2004, she beat her Republican opponent by 20% and became the holder of the record for the most popular votes in a statewide contested election in California. But this time around, things are not so easy and she wont be breaking any records with her popular vote this time around.

She currently has a disapproval rating higher than her approval rating, one of the largest newspapers in the state has refused to endorse because they believe that after 18 years in the Senate she has failed to distinguish herself in any meaningful way and that they see no reason to believe that she will do with another 6 years in office.

But this is California, a state that President Obama won by 24% or more than 3.2 million votes. But in addition to that, something else that could work in Boxer’s favor this time around is a statewide proposition to legalize marijuana. That ballot question could draw many Democrats who otherwise were not interested in voting this time around, to the polls and while there, they just might push the button for Boxer.

For her part though. Republican Carly Fiorina is holding her own, has all the money she needs to keep pushing her message and pulling out her vote and at the moment, while she is behind Boxer, by less than 6 percent, Boxer is still under the 50% mark, a place that no incumbent should be in this close to the election.

Anyone of these three seats could easily break for the Republican and give control of the Senate back to the G.O.P. and the possibility of this happening increases each day that we get closer to Election Day. But even if neither Delaware, California or West Virginia fail to Republicans, with a 50/50 split it is quite conceivable that any one of handful of Democrats could switch Parties or in the case of Independent Joe Lieberman, decide to causcus with the Republicans instead of the Democrats.

On the House side, Republican victories are even more lopsided than they are in the Senate.

In the House of Representatives Republicans could possibly end up with the largest number of seats they have held since 1946 when the GOP won 246 seats. Currently it looks like the G.O.P. can actually win at least 62 seats, thereby breaking the House down to 241 Republicans and 194 Democrats. This projection is much higher than most estimates being publicly announced which, for the most part range in the 40’s. But my projection still falls below that of Patrick Ruffini a reputable and leading G.O.P. strategist who has been in the trenches for quite some time now. Ruffiini believes that the figure will certainly be somewhere over 50 seats but believes a 70 seat gain is not out of the question.

No matter what, the results of the midterm elections will produce profound changes in the direction of policy and at the very least change the pace of the Obama agenda .

But there remains an aspect of the 2010 midterm elections which is being overshadowed by the anticipated turnover in Congress and it could have an more even more important long term effect on politics.

That is the 37 gubernatorial elections being held throughout the nation. Of them Republicans are expected to pick up at least 8 new statehouses bringing them from 23 where they are currently at, to 31, leaving Democrats with Governors in only 19 states.

That number is profoundly important because in 2011 the once every decade census data is poured over by the states and with they draw the new the state legislative a congressional districts lines from which Americans will elect their representatives for the decade to come. Having Governors in 31 states, will give the G.O.P. an advantage in drawing districts that it will be easier to elect Republicans in.

But in addition to that, Governors can play a crucial role in presidential elections.

There ability to coordinate their states for national candidates is invaluable and having that advantage over Democrats in almost a dozen states, will give whomever the Republican presidential nominee is a leg up over President Obama in 2012. Of course if 2010 proves to be as devastating for Democrats as it is looking, President Obama may not be the Democrat nominee. I feel that if Democrat losses are as profound as they are shaping up to be, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will resign her post and in time declare that she will offer a primary challenge to President Obama in order to save the Democratic Party and the nation from him.

Of course it only takes one world event to turn things around and in politics 5 weeks is an eternity. But if things continue going as they are right now, Democrats are going to descend into the political wilderness for years to come and President Obama is going to be a one term President who Republican can thank for bringing them back to power and whom Democrats will blame for squandering their opportunity to maintain control of Washington for years to come. 

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

Political Winners and Losers of The Week

Politics 24/7 Winners and Losers

Bookmark and Share

Week of 11/30 – 12/06/09


Politics 24/7 Thumbs Down

 Senator Max Baucus PhotobucketPhotobucket

Democrat Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus admitted to sending a nomination for his girlfriend and former staffer, Melodee Hanes to President Obama for the job of US Attorney for Montana. The admission came only after a news outlet that that covers events involving the US Department of Justice, discovered the relationship between Baucus, Hanes, and her nomination. Were it not for the discovery by a third party, Senator Baucus would not have admitted to anything. Hanes was not ultimately selected for the job by President Obama and since Hanes did not get the position, it is not an issue. However, what is at issue is the integrity of another powerful Democrat. Any politician who is sincere and above reproach, would recuse themselves from making such a nomination, with the understanding that even if their girlfriend was the most qualified person for the job, the romantic involvement would not, given the circumstances, provide the greatest sense of confidence in the nomination. Patronage is nothing new and this incident is not necessarily a scandal, especially compared with the improprieties of other Democrat leaders like Charlie Rangel, but it does show that Max Baucus is just as much a part of the problem in Washington as the rest of them.

Mike HuckabeePhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucket

In a story that ended this past week and began the week before that, the former Republican Governor from Arkansas and GOP presidential hopeful who turned into a Fox News Channel T.V. show host, lost any chance of aspiring to the presidency of the United States anytime soon. As governor Huckabee pardoned and commuted the sentences of more criminals than all of his three predecessors put together, a  few of those whose sentences were expedited by him were found to have committed violent rapes after being freed early. The issue was a mark against him in his campaign for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008. But now another criminal offered leniency by Huck, killed 4 police officers in Washington state after his early release from prison. No matter what, Mike Huckabee bears a burden of responsibility for the process that made this possible and no matter what reasoning or excuses that may be made, the early releases of prisoners by Huckabee have expedited the deaths of a combined total of at least five, if not more people, as well as several rapes. Huckabee’s leadership failed those people and their families and failed to protect all of us. At the very least, Huckabee should suffer a dashing of any hope of becoming President of the United States and to call him a loser of the week is an understatement.

The EconomyPhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucket

Nationally, Democrats are boasting the virtues of the fact that we only lost 110,000 jobs in October. The fact that October typically brings large numbers of seasonal holiday hiring’s and that we still lost more than  a hundred thousand jobs does not seem to matter to Democrats. They ignore the fact that jobs are still being lost and that the imploding economy held down seasonal hiring. They also ignore the continued hemorrhaging of jobs in areas associated with a sustainable rebound in activity, including trade, transportation, utilities, construction and manufacturing. And while the Administration celebrates there only being 110,000 jobs lost, they fail to embark upon any policies that will truly increase any longterm job growth and establish sustainable  economic growth. Instead they promote government spending which produces no return on the dollar and no long term promise. Adding to the liberal celebration over things “not being worse” is the Administration’s proven doctoring of the books, ala Recovery.org which recorded jobs in places that don’t exist, and  you have liberal slights of hand that do not include 100,000 jobs deleted from the rolls of those looking for a work because they gave up. In the end what you have is no reason to party or to be optimistic about current economic policies. No matter what, despite White House spawned celebrations that areextolled by a media hypnotized by the President, the economy was a loser this week and if things keep going this way, it will be losing for a long time to come.

RedWhiteBlue.gif picture by kempite


POLITICS 24/7 Thumbs Up

General Stanley McChrystalPhotobucketPhotobucket

After a long awaited decision, President Obama has agreed to send the man on the ground and in charge of the war effort in Afghanistan, the forces that he requested to get the job done. McChrystal was smart though. He didn’t just request the troops. Several weeks ago, frustrated by no signs of the President’s  commitment to the cause, McChrystal allowed his position on more troops  to “leak” out. Word quickly spread that the man who knew what he was doing and what needed to be done in Afghanistan was ready to resign if he didn’t get what he wanted. Such “leaks”  do not happen by chance in the covert world of military planning and operations…………..at least not unless of course they are intentionally orchestrated. The events helped put the issue of Afghanistan on the front burner and consequently put in motion the chain of events that spurred the President into action. Shortly after the “leak”, the President met with McChrystal and all of sudden convened meetings with his war council, among the first of his administration. McChrystal did not get the full compliment of forces that he officially requested but something tells me that the good General is a good poker player and that heexaggerated his numbers intentionally so that he would wound up with what he really needed. On this one, it’s McChrystal one, politicians zero.

The TalibanPhotobucket

Although President Obama finally moved on his commitment to the war in Afghanistan, which he calls a war of necessity, he provided the main enemy, in the war there, with some crucial information. President Obama told the enemy when they can expect the pressure to be taken off of them by letting them know that the US will begin to pull out of Afghanistan in 18 months. That type of itinerary is not exactly the one that should be shared with those who we are trying to keep in the dark on things. Perhaps that type of public timeline is a good way for a “community organizer” to let his volunteers knows how long they have to get their message out but it is not the way a President should organize a war effort. Of course this timeline could always be moved up. Problem is, in 18 months, if President Obama back pedals on this one, his liberal base, which wants us out as soon as yesterday, will be quite angered an not at a very good time. That will be only 18 months before his reelection effort. Not a good time to have your base of support pissed at you. President Obama would have been best served, and would have best served us, by not letting the Taliban know how long they have to hold on and how long they need to stay hidden under their rocks and in their caves.

Carly FiorinaPhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucket

The former CEO of Hewlett Packard recently declared that she will be seeking the opportunity to run against California’s US Senator Barbara “Call Me Senator” Boxer and this past Saturday she made it clear that she is a force to be reckoned with. After winning her own battle against breast cancer, Republicans turned to Fiorina to give their response to the President’s weekly Saturday address. With the ongoing healthcare debate taking center stage, her response was one that resonated loudly, clearly and much more profoundly than anything President Obama has ever said on the issue. In her six and a half minute address, Fiorina highlighted a recent government medical panel’s conclusion to delay mammogram tests by a decade in an attempt to save costs. Quite eloquently and with a tone of calmness and dignity that Barbara Boxer could only find in others when it is pointed out to her,  Fiorina explained how the same Preventive Services Task Force that recommended women put of testing, is the same task force that the current healthcare reform bill empowers to influence the coverage and preventive care that government run healthcare will allow for or provide. She also pointed out that the bill specifically authorizes (sec. 4105) that the Secretary of Health and Human Services deny payment for preventive services that this same Preventive Service Task Force recommends against. She adds, “do we really want government bureaucrats dictating how we prevent and treat something like breast cancer”? She also points out that “there is a reason why American women with breast cancer have a higher survival rate than women in countries with government run health care.” All in all, Carly Fiorina delivered one of the most powerful speeches against government run healthcare that this most recent debate has yet seen. (See the video below for yourself) And at the same time, she just gained herself the confidence of a lot of people who are looking for the right person to fire that silver bullet into the career of the nasty, flippant, onoxious, and arrogant, liberal queen of mean, Barbara Boxer.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics