Patterico's Pontifications


A Wild Prediction on Down Ballot Races

Filed under: General — WLS @ 12:24 pm

Posted by WLS:

I’m going to presume in this post that Palin makes no horrific errors over the next 55 days, and the McCain/Palin ticket heads into election day pretty much where they are now — no worse than neck-and-neck with Obama, and still enjoying strong support at the grass roots.

One area where this will produce a huge impact IMO is in Congressional races for seats with freshman democrats that should be vulnerable in an ordinary election year.

The 3 freshman democrats who took over 3 seats in Indiana would be at the top the list. Heath Shuler in North Carolina would be another, as would the guy who won the special election in Mississippi back in the spring.

Those are all seats where there is a historical GOP advantage, but conservative democrat challengers were able to win them in 2006 amid the GOP meltdown.

The generic ballot advantage for the democrats has fallen significantly over the last 10 days. Party self-identification in one of the recent polls had fallen from a 12% democrat advantage to 1%.

If the GOP has challengers in these races, the improved turnout of the GOP combined with a return of independents and conservative democrats to voting for GOP candidates should produce a series of close victories in these races.

The huge number of GOP retirements out of the House, creating many open seats for democrats to go after, may make it impossible for the GOP to take back the House, even if McCain/Palin wins handily.

And the lack of quality candidates for democrat or open seats — combined with the sheer number of seats the GOP is defending in the Senate this year — makes progress in the Senate unlikely.

I think the GOP will wake up the day after the election in much brighter spirits than was assumed to be the case a couple months ago.

20 Responses to “A Wild Prediction on Down Ballot Races”

  1. I note that you use the lower-case democrat instead of the proper noun Democrat. I am assuming that you do it out of disgust. In a similar vein, I refuse the capitalize the “y” for the New York yankees.

    One quibble though is that by using the lower-case you are conflating the political party with the other definition of “democrat,” namely those who advocate and support democracy. Some of us would argue that Democrats aren’t really democrats (Exhibit 1: Iraq).

    Didn’t we have a debate here a while back on using “the Democrat Party” versus “the Democratic Party”? Perhaps I am reopening old wounds.

    But now back to the main point of your post: Perhaps a McCain/Palin victory might encourage some of those conservative Southern and Midwestern Dems to bolt their party for the GOP, especially if the far left continues to hold the reins of power within the party caucus.

    JVW (6c4300)

  2. A proof for your thesis is the 180 that Pelosi has done on allowing a drilling vote.

    I never would have believed in January that the moratorium on offshore drilling would not be extended. I would have bet my life that there would not be an affirmative bill expressly promoting such. Come October, it will happen.

    Ed (f35a20)

  3. That’d be a pleasant surprise – but it would appear that a geniune upset would have to occur on multiple fronts to negate the advantages that the Dems currently enjoy in both houses.

    Dmac (e639cc)

  4. Dmac — I think we’ll see pretty much the same margin in the House as there is now, which would be a disappointment by Dems. And we’ll see 3-4 more Dems in the Senate.

    But the Dems will have to defend far more Senate seats than the GOP in the next two election cycles — nearly 1/2 the GOP seats are up for re-election this particular cycle, whle only about 1/4 of the Dem seats are up.

    As for the House, the GOP is going to have to fight that battle one seat at a time. Fortunately, the extreme liberals in the caucus control the agenda, and will continually force their conservative members from GOP leaning districts to make hard votes — like the oil drilling vote.

    WLS (26b1e5)

  5. Coming soon: the Sarah Palin doll. It should sell well among Democrats. They’ll want to stick pins in it.

    dchamil (44dca7)

  6. Coming soon: the Sarah Palin doll.

    Already available.

    aunursa (1b5bad)

  7. Good points, WLS – I hadn’t really looked much farther past the upcoming elections.

    “…180 that Pelosi has done on allowing a drilling vote.”

    I was under the impression that Pelosi wasn’t really changing her position all that dramatically – more like a stealth agreement with a small number of Republicans in order to give her cover on that issue. Am I wrong in that assumption?

    Dmac (e639cc)

  8. Dmac – Like Baracky, Pelosi has had that position all along, except when she didn’t.

    JD (3f9019)

  9. Ruh roh,

    “Palin makes no horrific errors over the next 55 days”

    Do you mean something like this?,8599,1839724,00.html

    Micheal Kinsley


    “Alaska is, in essence, an adjunct member of OPEC. It has four different taxes on oil, which produce more than 89% of the state’s unrestricted revenue. On average, three-quarters of the value of a barrel of oil is taken by the state government before that oil is permitted to leave the state. Alaska residents each get a yearly check for about $2,000 from oil revenues, plus an additional $1,200 pushed through by Palin last year to take advantage of rising oil prices. Any sympathy the governor of Alaska expresses for folks in the lower 48 who are suffering from high gas prices or can’t afford to heat their homes is strictly crocodile tears.

    As if it couldn’t support itself, Alaska also ranks No. 1, year after year, in money it sucks in from Washington. In 2005 (the most recent figures), according to the Tax Foundation, Alaska ranked 18th in federal taxes paid per resident ($5,434) but first in federal spending received per resident ($13,950). Its ratio of federal spending received to federal taxes paid ranks third among the 50 states, and in the absolute amount it receives from Washington over and above the amount it sends to Washington, Alaska ranks No. 1.”

    Wonder how this is going to sell in Kansas?

    jharp (ef54fc)

  10. “A proof for your thesis is the 180 that Pelosi has done on allowing a drilling vote.”

    It turns out that statement was, indeed, not the case – Pelosi tried an end – around on the issue, and was effectively stymied by the GOP leadership:

    Dmac (e639cc)

  11. This is getting beyond tiresome with this particular Troll in question – the bandwith he’s taking up alone is becoming ridiculous.

    Get out of here, you’ve humiliated yourself in too many instances to count at this point.

    Dmac (e639cc)

  12. Just trying to add to the debate though it is contrary to the beliefs of the other posters.

    WLS said “I’m going to presume in this post that Palin makes no horrific errors over the next 55 days”

    And I thought I’d be worthwhile for all to know what is out there.

    If this is a rightie only weblog please let me know.

    You can go the NRO way and ban all posters or do like the other right wingers and heavily censor.

    It’s patterico’s blog and he can do whatever he wants. I always have respected him allowing lefties to post.

    After all, we all don’t know what we are talking about and it should only strengthen the dittohead mantra. Right?

    jharp (ef54fc)

  13. Dmac 3:36 – the 180 was done during the recess, just as Hot Air recounted. She was getting pressure specifically from the first-termers in her Caucus who told her they could not justify the “end-runs” and obfuscations. DNC grown-ups explained the facts to her. They knew the worm had turned on drilling. Palin’s arrival further cemented things.

    In my post, I was not saying Pelosi, individually, would change her vote. Only that she would allow a vote. I wrote the post today, not before the recess.

    Ed (f35a20)

  14. You can go the NRO way and ban all posters or do like the other right wingers and heavily censor.

    The Leftists never get tired of lying, do they? This one is especially brazen.

    After all, we all don’t know what we are talking about

    On that, we agree, and you have proven, repeatedly.

    JD (3f9019)

  15. Elitists!

    love2008 (1b037c)

  16. “In my post, I was not saying Pelosi, individually, would change her vote.”

    Thanks for the clarification, Ed – I stand corrected.

    “You can go the NRO way and ban all posters or do like the other right wingers and heavily censor…”

    You know full well that this is demonstrably untrue on this blog, but you’re rapidly approaching Levi – levels of rudeness and insanity. Precisely because the proprietors here have a remarkably hands – off policy towards everyone intially, you’ve taken advantage of their patience by repeatedly going far over the line in your so – called “commentary.”

    “Just trying to add to the debate…”

    You really think so? Then please tell us how the repeated useage of the phrases of “boot – licking Republicans,” “idiots,” “morons” and other clarifying adjectives are “adding to the debate.”
    What kind of debate begins when one commenter immediately and incessantly insults everyone who doesn’t happen to agree with him – in every post?

    It ain’t Emily Post here, but if I wanted to read that type of Tourette’s Syndrome behavior, I’d go back to Kos.

    Dmac (e639cc)

  17. I like how all of a sudden jharp acts like he doesn’t know how things go around here.

    Icy Truth (e88f15)

  18. I believe I understand how things go here and don’t mean to pretend I don’t. And just to be clear I am appreciative of the privilege to post. And I think Patterico show guts and business savvy by allowing contrary posters.

    And as far as the derogatory names I think everyone is a little guilty at one time or another as shown below. We can all do a little better.

    You are a lying little fuck.

    Comment by JD — 9/9/2008 @ 1:45 pm

    you insufferable asshole.

    Comment by Jack Klompus — 9/9/2008 @ 2:01 pm

    I don’t want to get into a he said first debate. I’m well aware it a dictatorship here as it should be.

    And what do you think the Alaskanomics is a potential problem?

    jharp (ef54fc)

  19. No, it isn’t a potential problem.

    And I disagree with Jack . . . you’re sufferable.

    Icy Truth (31efee)

  20. #18 Icy Truth:

    . . . you’re sufferable.

    Well, we certainly do, anyway.

    EW1(SG) (3f9181)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2669 secs.