@SeanTrende runs the numbers on the 2014 Senate, nearly suffers total protonic reversal.

My eyes keep skittering over this Sean Trende piece about likely 2014 Senate losses. Not because it’s bad news: it’s not.

[Sean's calculation table] is a grim picture for Senate Democrats, suggesting that the president would have to get his approval above 50 percent by Election Day before they would be favored to hold the chamber. This is also consistent with what we’ve seen in polling, which shows the seven “red state” Democrats in truly severe states of distress, while Democrats in Iowa, Michigan, New Hampshire and Colorado are exhibiting surprising weakness. If these 11 seats are showing similar signs of weakness in November, Democrats will have an extremely difficult time holding the chamber. At Obama’s current 44 percent approval rating, we’d expect Democrats to lose somewhere between nine and 13 seats.



Heliocentric theory has a well-known conservative Republican bias.

Of course I’m going to mock the Left for this. Karma, baby, karma: if I have to listen to cr*p about how Republicans don’t believe in evolution*, then I will happy to respond about how Democrats don’t believe that the Earth revolves around the sun.  Until maybe we can all shaddap about these surveys for a change?




Two cheers for The New York Post’s opposition to fusion voting.

The New York Post almost gets it, here:

In its lengthy report exposing mischief in New York’s political system, the Moreland Commission missed a major target for real reform: the state’s minor political parties.

Because of a quirk in state law, minor parties in New York wield influence far beyond their numbers. That’s because New York is the rare state that allows minor parties to cross-endorse candidates of the top two parties.

It’s an invitation to corruption: Cross-endorsements give minor parties power by allowing them to extract promises — or cash — out of major-party candidates in exchange for giving them an extra ballot line or doing their dirty work.



Younger Millennial voters shifting hard towards GOP.

Background: Harvard University’s Institute of Politics did a study on Millennial (18-29 year old voters), and came to some interesting conclusions:

Republican and Democratic leaders should find little solace in the results. The survey found that 33 percent of young Americans consider themselves Democrats and 24 percent identify with the GOP. The largest and growing segment is independents, 41 percent of the total.

Democrats’ advantage among young voters is fading. Among the oldest Millennials (ages 25-29), Democrats hold a 16 point lead over the GOP – 38 percent say they’re Democrats and 22 percent call themselves Republicans. Among the youngest of this rising generation (ages 18-24), the gap is just 6 points, 31 percent for Democrats and 25 percent for Republicans.

Um.  Republican leaders should TOTALLY find solace in the results. That age-based 10 point shift towards the GOP pretty much gut-shoots one of the Democrats’ long-term demographic strategies*.  And that’s just voters who are 18 to 24 now. There’s going to be more of them in 2016, and I can’t see them being any happier with Barack Obama, the Democrats, or Obamacare… (more…)


Quote of the Day, They CAN Be Taught! edition. #obamacare

The WaPo actually wanted to write a story about this:

…in recent days, Senate Republicans have been urging their members to tout new “Your Story” Web pages in English and Spanish that invite people to vent about the shortcomings of the health-insurance initiative.

…but it’s the WaPo, which means that they just can’t come out and say The Republican party won the messaging battle over Obamacare, and Democrats are ever-so-slowly scrambling to come up with a counter.  That would imply that the Democratic leadership is made up of incompetent goofballs who spent two months twiddling their thumbs while Obamacare blew up on the launch pad.  And then irradiated some kittens. While blasting out Nickelback tunes. (more…)


Attention, Republican legislators: let the Democrats vote FIRST.

As I have said, many times: I do not know what the right answer is when it comes to intervening in Syria.  Every option is bad, with negative consequences and poor results.  If  I was a Member of Congress I would be frantically trying to go through what information I have available, in order to determine the least-worst scenario and vote for that.  Because of all of that, I cannot in good conscience call for Members of Congress (Republican AND Democrat) to do anything except vote their consciences: if I don’t have the right answer myself, I shouldn’t try to second-guess a legislator’s own sense of morality.

But I will so totally give tactical advice on when to vote.  Glenn Reynolds’ advice here is spot-on:

If I were the GOP — in both the House and Senate — I wouldn’t let a single Republican vote be cast until all the Democrats have voted.



Advice to Members of Congress regarding #syria.

Apparently, somewhere about half* of Republicans in Congress follow @redstate on Twitter, so there’s a decent chance that they’ll see this advice.  Anyway, I’ve been banging a drum on this issue all weekend, but I’ll bang it again: vote your conscience. Don’t feel pressured to vote against intervention, for intervention, for a different kind of intervention than the one you favor, or any other combination or scenario. There’s a reason why Speaker John Boehner signalled that he hopes other caucus members will vote to authorize, or why House Majority Leader Eric Cantor only intends to vote for intervention: they’re not going to whip the vote, and there’s not going to be a push to rush the process.

So don’t rush into this, and vote for what you think is the best, or more likely the least bad, option.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

PS: As I noted here, I don’t actually know what the best option is.  Every one of them ends poorly.

*The exact number is 51.5% of all Republicans with ‘official’ Twitter accounts.  Apparently 97% of all Congressmen have Twitter accounts, so it’s safe enough to say that about half of the GOP members of Congress are at least monitoring RedState.


I reserve the right for *my* political party to wreck the day of *your* political party.

Reading this and this is more or less forcing me to remind folks of something: it is, in point of fact, perfectly legitimate for a political party to use its control of a state legislature to screw over the opposition party.  Note the use of the term ‘legitimate.’ I’m not saying that it’s nice or decent or even smart; merely that this is the life that we have chosen.

Case in point: Illinois legislature was, and is, heavily Democratic.  In 2010 the Republicans gained four federal Congressional seats, kept a fifth that they were expected to lose.  In 2011 the state legislature, having to redraw the maps anyway because Illinois was losing a seat*, engaged in ruthless redistricting.  In 2012 the Republicans lost five federal Congressional seats**  And that is how it works.  Partisan affiliation is not a protected class. You identify with a political party, you take the political party’s lumps.  Simple as that.   Don’t like that particular set of lumps?  Switch parties: maybe the new set of lumps will be more to your liking. (more…)


IRS rank-and-file STILL not getting it?

The first step in fixing a problem is to admit that you have one*.

Oh, pity this poor, poor, put-upon Cincinnati office anonymous IRS lawyer. S/he wrote in to Robert Anderson’s Witnesseth blog after Anderson noted that campaign contributions among IRS lawyers skewed heavily towards Democrats (government lawyers in general do, really).  After complaining a bit about that awful Republican party, and its hostility towards government lawyers, the government lawyer finished up:

…if there is a lack of political diversity among federal government attorneys, it can be attributed almost entirely to the Republican Party agenda.  That agenda makes me, and other federal government attorneys, very uneasy.

Hey!  You know what makes me uneasy?  IRS lawyers who go around and deliberately target conservative groups and individuals in order to further a partisan agenda that originated in Washington, DC.  Guess which one of us has a trail of evidence justifying said unease. (more…)


Charlie Cook: GOP should (air quotes) ‘start’ leaking dirt on Obama to press.

Charlie Cook has some very nasty, very vicious, and very enterta… I mean, cruel… advice for Republicans:

…as much as congressional Republicans are enjoying their schadenfreude, they would be well advised to think long and hard about their next steps. Even the most cursory look at opinion polls or focus groups reveals that the public is convinced we have an ineffectual and out-of-touch Congress that spends too much time backbiting, grandstanding, and Monday-morning quarterbacking while the country’s problems fester. Arguably, showboating for the cameras and holding hearings are what Congress does best; the temptation is unavoidable.

Republicans would be much wiser to pursue a third option: Dig up as much damaging information as they can about the Obama administration and leak it to reporters they know will write tough stories that won’t be traced back to the source. That way, the public won’t see the GOP as being obsessed with attacking the other side and playing gotcha at the expense of the big issues facing the country—the ones voters really care about.

Mind you, Charlie probably knows that this is highly redundant advice, too. NTIWKAAT, of course.

Moe Lane


BTW: The GOP just took control of Washington’s state Senate.


Democratic State Sens. Rodney Tom and Tim Sheldon announced they would create a majority power-sharing coalition with Senate Republicans, throwing control of the chamber into question.

While the new coalition pledged to start preparing for next month’s session, Democratic leaders who now hold a slim majority signaled they will fight the proposal.

One wonders how, given that the existing plan has been signed off on by the entire incoming GOP state Senate Caucus.  The way the deal goes: Tom and Sheldon get to be in charge.  The Republicans get to control crucial committees like Ways and Means, Commerce and Labor, Health Care* – and, here’s the fun one: they get to pick the majority floor leader.  That’s the person who decides which bill goes to which committee, which is another way of saying “the person who can kill or save bills.”  The Democrats get… to play with the parks and beaches, of which I understand Washington state has some very nice examples.

So, basically, nobody you care about is getting hammered on this one. (more…)


#rsrh The Hill: “Senate GOP furious newspaper got better briefing on Libya.”

The Hill: “Senate Republicans are furious the Obama administration rebuffed their attempts to learn details of the Benghazi attack, only to give the coveted information to The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal.”

Me: What goes around, comes around.

Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by TheBuckmaker.com