Meh. Color me as extremely skeptical. There are at least three reasons why. See if you can identify one of them in the following quote:
Desperate Democrats are rushing to save suddenly vulnerable House incumbents, even in states where President Barack Obama cruised to double-digit victories, amid fresh signs of Republican momentum less than a week before the midterm elections.
The once friendly terrain of New York, California, Obama's native state of Hawaii and adopted state of Illinois all now pose stiff challenges to Democrats who are determined to limit their losses next Tuesday.
Really? Seriously? Donk House seats in New York, California, and Hawaii are now in play? I suppose there are "red" enclaves in the Empire and Acapulco Golden States to where "wave" year upsets are not completely outside the realm of possibility, but Hawaii? Uh-uh. Not buying it. Sorry. And even if this is another "wave" year for the GOP (of which I am far from convinced), ain't no wave is gonna sweep any Aloha seats into the Republican column short of a comet strike.
Why did I leave out Illinois, you may be asking? This is why. And you're never going to convince me that the Democrats' national voter fraud operation isn't up and running on maximum overdrive in New York, California, Hawaii, and each of the forty-five other States across the fruitless plain.
This isn't to say that the Dems are going to shock the world and retake the House. Even Crazy Nancy Pelosi isn't being that publicly delusional. But the idea of the GOP picking up an additional ten to twenty House seats is, plainly and simply, absurd. They'll gain, or lose, a single-digit handful, but the House balance of power will remain pretty much unchanged.
You may have also picked up on the fact that I haven't yet mentioned my third reason not to expect a GOP "wave" on the House side. Here's a hint: It has nothing to do with fundraising or TV/radio/Internet advertising:
The [Democrat] party is relying on a big get-out-the-vote effort after registering 80,000 new voters in battleground districts.
That sentence should send a chill down the spine of every Pachyderm who remembers 2012. Recall that the GOP didn't get financially buried in that cycle; the party was competitive with Democrats up to and including Team Messiah on fundraising and campaign expenditures and media ad buys and the like. But if there was a factor that was more critical to the Donks' triumph at the presidential level and their running of the table in Senate races than voter fraud, it was their GOTV machine. Their registration of "new voters" and prowess at getting them to (multiple) polls to vote (multiple times) was nothing short of awesome. It was something Republicans are incapable of even coming close to replicating, even without the aspects that are reminiscent of a Michael Jackson Thriller video....
....and with two more years to have refined and developed the process further, I have no doubts - and neither should any of you - that it will be more than sufficient to enable House Democrats to at least break even, and certainly prevent their suffering any upsets on their own "turf".
There is one other thing that needs addressing: the notion that Barack Obama is "political ebola" for Democrat congressional candidates. While that's probably true to an extent, I think it's overrated in its likely impact on next Tuesday's election results. Indeed, the logic of the proffered dynamic is that The One's alleged unpopularity would actually matter if he was at the top of the ballet; since he isn't, this factor will have a minimal impact at best, methinks. And I'm speaking as one who believes that if there was an Obama-Romney rematch five days from now, Red Barry would win yet again, and probably by a bigger margin than he did two years ago.
We on the Right continue to make the mistake of looking at the current and forever reigning Imperial Monarch by conventional yardsticks of popularity and job performance. What's his approval number on this issue or that? Which party is favored on this issue or that? But none of those metrics apply to King Hussein. Remember why he was elected and re-elected: the color of his skin. It really is that simple. Barack Obama was handed the keys to the kingdom because he's (half) black, he was re-elected because he's (half) black, and he'll remain in the White House for the rest of his natural life because he's (half) black. Even if he faced another election ever again he would never, ever lose, because too many American voters don't want to be the targets of the stigma of "racism" for having "lynched" the First Black President. His is the Affirmative Action Presidency. As such, the usual rules of politics do not apply to him. Even if he was "incompetent" as opposed to a malevolent, foreign-minded, revolutionary political cancer, his every "failure" and scandal will always be excused, just as they always have been, by his overabundance of skin pigmentation. It's why, even if B.O. does leave voluntarily on January 20th, 2017, the Democrats will never nominate anyone but women or minorities for POTUS ever again. So either way, they will never relinquish the White House ever again, either.
It's that factor, if any, that will "trickle down" to congressional Democrat candidates on November 4th, not his purported polling anathema. LIVs and NIVs will simply always be much more forgiving of and trustful in them than they will ever be of Republicans. Indeed, I question whether Republican "waves" are even possible anymore.
Did I mention my final Senate predictions will go live here at midnight PST next Tuesday? You won't want to miss them, at least if you're of a....prudent mindset.....
No comments:
Post a Comment