The Democrats Are In HUGE Trouble

Shady · January 7, 2010

Here's some real analysis, unlike the claptrap some of my colleagues like to post from fair and balanced sources such as Talking Points Memo and The Huffington Post.

Democrats' rough year is just beginning

As the midterm election year opens, the euphoria among Democrats that accompanied President Obama's inauguration has disappeared. Even the least pessimistic Democrats fear sizable losses in November

Link

And...

The Byron Dorgan Thunderclap

A politically shrewd Senate Democratic staff member chatting about the future of health care negotiations stopped in midsentence late Tuesday afternoon as news flashed across his computer screen. "My God," he said. "Byron Dorgan is retiring."

It was a thunderclap moment in the politics of 2010, an unfortunate twist for Democrats already looking at a difficult election year. Dorgan, a veteran of three decades in Washington, suddenly turned his North Dakota Senate seat from one that Democrats had a reasonable chance of holding into a likely pickup for the Republicans.

Link

Seems like some of you still have your rose coloured glasses on! Probably the same rose coloured glasses you complained about when Cheney dismissed the insurgency in Iraq. It's funny to watch you in total denial. :lol:

punked · January 7, 2010

Hahaha the Washington post. Funny.

Shady · January 7, 2010

Baker’s funding shatters records

In one of the most aggressive political fund-raising pushes in recent memory, Republican gubernatorial hopeful Charles D. Baker has amassed a $1.85 million war chest over roughly five months of campaigning, tapping into a broad range of supporters and establishing himself as a major threat to Governor Deval Patrick’s reelection bid.

Baker doubled, in less than half the time, what Patrick raised for the entirety of 2009, despite a fund-raising visit by President Obama this past fall for the Democratic governor. Baker’s coffers currently hold almost three times the amount in Patrick’s campaign account.

Link

Looks like some Republicans are having a fine time fundraising! Poor Deval Patrick.

Oleg Bach · January 7, 2010

Things change when old senators retire. It's not just the loss of a vote - but the infliction of ambition that comes in the form of a replacement - Heaven only knows what these replacements will be - could be demons could be angels - power usually atttracts demons - and public service attracts the angels - so I wonder who is of more service to their fellow citizens in that regard..dems or reps?

punked · January 7, 2010

Baker’s funding shatters records

In one of the most aggressive political fund-raising pushes in recent memory, Republican gubernatorial hopeful Charles D. Baker has amassed a $1.85 million war chest over roughly five months of campaigning, tapping into a broad range of supporters and establishing himself as a major threat to Governor Deval Patrick’s reelection bid.

Baker doubled, in less than half the time, what Patrick raised for the entirety of 2009, despite a fund-raising visit by President Obama this past fall for the Democratic governor. Baker’s coffers currently hold almost three times the amount in Patrick’s campaign account.

Link

Looks like some Republicans are having a fine time fundraising! Poor Deval Patrick.

He better start funding raising because the RNC is bleeding money, right now only having 8 million Cash on Hand 5 million Less then the DNC. The Dems have the edge in Senate and Congress fund raising too. They also brought in a record all for their governors association and are for the first time ever close to the same as the Republicans for cash with that organization.

I am really worried though with the governor polling 10 points ahead of Baker but Shady I take this as in endorsement by you of Charles D. Baker. You know he is pro gay marriage right? How about pro choice? Glade too see you are admitting as Baker has these are outdated and crappy policies of the Republican party. Maybe more people could get behind them if this is what they believed. How does the tea party feel?

Ohhh you might not know this either because God knows you read the news with blinders on, but Baker has a primary to win and the last poll had him losing it.

Edited January 7, 2010 by punked

Shady · January 8, 2010

He better start funding raising because the RNC is bleeding money

Pure hyperbole.

right now only having 8 million Cash on Hand 5 million Less then the DNC.

13 to 8 isn't a huge difference. Especially since the Dems outspent Republicans by 4 to 1 in 2008.

Anyways, on to more good news! :lol:

Democrats Anxious Over a Once-Safe Seat

BOSTON — Martha M. Coakley, the Democrat running for Senator Edward M. Kennedy’s seat in Massachusetts, had seemed so certain of winning the special election on Jan. 19 that she barely campaigned last month.

But the dynamic has changed in recent days. The news that two senior Democratic senators will retire this year in the face of bleak re-election prospects has created anxiety and, even in this bluest of states, a sense that the balance of power has shifted dramatically from just a year ago.

With the holidays over and public attention refocused on the race, Ms. Coakley’s insistence on debating her Republican opponent, Scott P. Brown, only with a third-party candidate present has drawn mounting criticism.

And a new poll that showed a competitive race between Ms. Coakley and Mr. Brown has generated buzz on conservative blogs and energized the Brown campaign.

Link

The Dems are now worried about former senator Ted Kennedy's seat, in Massachusetts! Massachusetts!

:lol:

punked · January 8, 2010

Pure hyperbole.

13 to 8 isn't a huge difference. Especially since the Dems outspent Republicans by 4 to 1 in 2008.

Anyways, on to more good news!

Democrats Anxious Over a Once-Safe Seat

BOSTON — Martha M. Coakley, the Democrat running for Senator Edward M. Kennedy’s seat in Massachusetts, had seemed so certain of winning the special election on Jan. 19 that she barely campaigned last month.

But the dynamic has changed in recent days. The news that two senior Democratic senators will retire this year in the face of bleak re-election prospects has created anxiety and, even in this bluest of states, a sense that the balance of power has shifted dramatically from just a year ago.

With the holidays over and public attention refocused on the race, Ms. Coakley’s insistence on debating her Republican opponent, Scott P. Brown, only with a third-party candidate present has drawn mounting criticism.

And a new poll that showed a competitive race between Ms. Coakley and Mr. Brown has generated buzz on conservative blogs and energized the Brown campaign.

Link

The Dems are now worried about former senator Ted Kennedy's seat, in Massachusetts! Massachusetts!

Your very source says

The poll that suggested Ms. Coakley’s lead was narrowing, which was conducted by Rasmussen Reports and does not meet the polling standards of The New York Times because it relied on automated telephone calls

But if the Dems win that special election Shady you might have change the title of this thread.

http://www.mrc.org/timeswatch/articles/2010/20100108022949.aspx

Shady · January 8, 2010

But if the Dems win that special election Shady you might have change the title of this thread.

Really? I'd have to change the title of this thread if the Dems hold a seat in Massachusetts? Sure. :rolleyes:

Remember these comment punked! :lol:

AND it looks like Shady called Virgina too soo too.

I can't remember. Who ended up winning Virginia? :lol:

And as we have seen time and time again Shady's calling elections way toooooooo soon for the republicans the NJ governor race is now neck and neck.

I can't remember. Who ended up winning New Jersey? :lol:

Still not worried did you see both Governor Races you said would be blow outs are within one point as of today?

So, how'd those states go that you insisted I called too soon? Something about blow outs? What does a 20 point loss in Virginia equal? And what does a 7 point loss in New Jersey equal? :lol:

Wipe the egg off your face!

punked · January 8, 2010

Really? I'd have to change the title of this thread if the Dems hold a seat in Massachusetts? Sure.

Remember these comment punked!

I can't remember. Who ended up winning Virginia?

I can't remember. Who ended up winning New Jersey?

Stay

So, how'd those states go that you insisted I called too soon? Something about blow outs? What does a 20 point loss in Virginia equal? And what does a 7 point loss in New Jersey equal?

Wipe the egg off your face!

No problems I remember who won the last 5 special congressional elections over the last year. Three of which you called for republicans how was that Teddy win in NY or Hoffman winning that seat hasn't been Democrat in 100 years? I remember that one the one which the Republicans have held for 100 years was a one you said would show dissatisfaction with the Dems. How did that turn out again. It will be easy to take the house right?

"The fundraising disparity between the two committees is striking: The DCCC outraised the NRCC this year by more than $18 million, according to FEC figures at the end of November. The NRCC has only $4.3 million left in its campaign account — with more than $2 million in debt — leaving it with just a pittance to fund the dozens of races it hopes to aggressively contest.

The DCCC, meanwhile, is sitting on a $15.3 million nest egg (with $2.6 million owed), steadily expanding its cash-on-hand advantage over Republicans throughout the year."

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/31077.html#ixzz0c45TNQRq

Don't worry though Shady they can on their good looks and charm, oh and having more retirements then Democrats. Stay Classy.

It is ok though in the last 70 years Republicans have controlled congress for 12 years, Americans clearly love them right? HA

Shady · January 8, 2010

No problems I remember who won the last 5 special congressional elections over the last year. Three of which you called for republicans

No, I didn't call them for Republicans. I linked to the vote counting website in NY, which had the Republican leading, in which I said that things were looking good. That's a direct quote, that things were looking good. How is that calling the election for the Republican? It's sad that you've resorted to lying.

Anyways, the best part of your link...

"But he also noted that Republicans were greatly outspent in nearly every race in the wave year of 1994 but still managed to pick up 52 seats." :lol:

I'd rather be more popular and have higher voter intensity than be less popular with less voter intensity but more money. It didn't work for the Dems in '93 and it won't work in 2010. Besides, Republican's outspent the Dems in '06, and where did it get them? It's pretty sad that you're only hope is money! :lol:

Shady · January 10, 2010

Uh Oh!

"Republican Scott Brown leads Martha Coakley 48-47 in Massachusetts."

PPP

Can you imagine if the Dems lose a senate seat in Massachusetts?

:lol:

punked · January 10, 2010

Uh Oh!

"Republican Scott Brown leads Martha Coakley 48-47 in Massachusetts."

PPP

Can you imagine if the Dems lose a senate seat in Massachusetts?

Meanwhile, polls from the Boston Globe and Boston Herald should be released in the morning.

A source tells Jim Geraghty that the Globe poll finds Coakley ahead by 15 points and the Herald poll finds her ahead by seven points -- but just one point among likely voters.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/01/09/new_massachusetts_polls.html

Behind by 15 points you got a real race on your hands there Shady. So you ready to put your money where you mouth is? Change the title of the thread if your boy loses.

punked · January 10, 2010

Quite the Race Shady

Democrat Martha Coakley, buoyed by her durable statewide popularity, enjoys a solid, 15-percentage-point lead over Republican rival Scott Brown as the race for US Senate enters the homestretch, according to a new Boston Globe poll of likely voters.

Half of voters surveyed said they would pick Coakley, the attorney general, if the election were held today, compared with 35 percent who would pick Brown. Nine percent were undecided, and a third candidate in the race, independent Joseph L. Kennedy, received 5 percent.

Republicans should be so lucky in all races.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/01/10/senate_poll_coakley_up_15_points/

Smallc · January 10, 2010

Yeah, but right wing talk radio has been telling him it's close, so it must be true.

Bugs · January 10, 2010

Yeah, but right wing talk radio has been telling him it's close, so it must be true.

The good thing is that we will soon know who has won, and who the greater deceivers are.

In elections like this, polls become campaign weapons. The stakes become bigger than the seat itself. Polls are too easily fiddled with to be trusted, as the resources of national politics bear down on a local election. It's no longer a representative case of how the public is feeling.

The last time this happened, in upstate New York, the winner ran far to the right of their own inclinations. The new member was reported as breaking four promises in her first week of voting, one of them a vote for healthcare just in the nick of time for Obama.

The one thing we can agree on -- if the Republican wins in Mass ... it means the Democrats are in trouble.

punked · January 10, 2010

The good thing is that we will soon know who has won, and who the greater deceivers are.

In elections like this, polls become campaign weapons. The stakes become bigger than the seat itself. Polls are too easily fiddled with to be trusted, as the resources of national politics bear down on a local election. It's no longer a representative case of how the public is feeling.

The last time this happened, in upstate New York, the winner ran far to the right of their own inclinations. The new member was reported as breaking four promises in her first week of voting, one of them a vote for healthcare just in the nick of time for Obama.

The one thing we can agree on -- if the Republican wins in Mass ... it means the Democrats are in trouble.

Yet when the Republicans lost a seat that had been republican for 100 years in NY last 2 months ago it ment nothing? I wonder why?

Shady · January 10, 2010

if the Republican wins in Mass ... it means the Democrats are in trouble.

Just the fact that they're in a tough race already indicates they're in trouble. However, if they lose this race in Mass, it means they're in deadly trouble. History already illustrates to us that the Dems will lose 1 or 2 senate seats, and around 20 house seats. But because of their hard-left agenda, it's probably going to be more like 2 - 4 senate seats and close to 30 house seats. But it could get even worse.

punked · January 10, 2010

Just the fact that they're in a tough race already indicates they're in trouble. However, if they lose this race in Mass, it means they're in deadly trouble. History already illustrates to us that the Dems will lose 1 or 2 senate seats, and around 20 house seats. But because of their hard-left agenda, it's probably going to be more like 2 - 4 senate seats and close to 30 house seats. But it could get even worse.

They would still control the house and Senate with those numbers eh?

Shady · January 10, 2010

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/01/09/new_massachusetts_polls.html

Behind by 15 points you got a real race on your hands there Shady.

LOL, this poll reminds me of the poll you posted showing Corzine up by 9 points! How'd that turn out for you?

When examining the polls, it's easy to see why there's such a difference. the PPP poll includes 290 independents, as oppose to the Globe poll which only counts 81 independents.

punked · January 10, 2010

LOL, this poll reminds me of the poll you posted showing Corzine up by 9 points! How'd that turn out for you?

When examining the polls, it's easy to see why there's such a difference. the PPP poll includes 290 independents, as oppose to the Globe poll which only counts 81 independents.

Accept the Herald has a poll out today with Coakley up by 8 points today.

Your PPP poll doesn't include the Libertarian candidate if you didn't notice. So if we want to start talking poll validity we can get into that. Again If you trust your poll so much put your money where you mouth is. The election is on the 19th we will find out.

PS when polling you are suppose to have the right voter make up sample. If there are no independents in Mass then you poll none of them see what I am saying.

PPs Browns only chance is if Dems stay home. His message doesn't play well in a state where 60% what Obama's Health care reform.

Although Brown seems like a fun guy, likes to pose nude in press and what not.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/1/10/823549/-MA-Sen:-Scott-Brown-posed-nude

Edited January 10, 2010 by punked

Shady · January 10, 2010

PPs Browns only chance is if Dems stay home.

Which could definitely happen. All of the voter intensity is on the Republican side.

Although Brown seems like a fun guy, likes to pose nude in press and what not

LOL, the Dem must be in real trouble if your side is digging up things from 1982. Kind of like McDonnell's thesis. Again, how'd that work out? :lol:

Shady · January 12, 2010

The DSCC has purchased $567K in ads in the Boston and Springfield markets, a source tells Hotline OnCall.

The move is the most overt DC Dems have made so far in shoring up their candidate in the race against state Sen. Scott Brown ®, demonstrating the party's worry that Brown is gaining ground ahead of next Tuesday's election.

Earlier, the MA Dems, in concert with Coakley's campaign, launched a 2-day ad blitz in the same 2 markets at a cost of $288K.

Link

Guess what punked? They're not spending all of that money this week because they think she's up by 15 points! :lol:

On the other side...

Thank you! $1,303,302.50 raised!

Link

Brown raises over a million dollars in one day! All from small, individual donations.

punked · January 12, 2010

The DSCC has purchased $567K in ads in the Boston and Springfield markets, a source tells Hotline OnCall.

The move is the most overt DC Dems have made so far in shoring up their candidate in the race against state Sen. Scott Brown ®, demonstrating the party's worry that Brown is gaining ground ahead of next Tuesday's election.

Earlier, the MA Dems, in concert with Coakley's campaign, launched a 2-day ad blitz in the same 2 markets at a cost of $288K.

Link

Guess what punked? They're not spending all of that money this week because they think she's up by 15 points!

On the other side...

Thank you! $1,303,302.50 raised!

Link

Brown raises over a million dollars in one day! All from small, individual donations.

Almost all from out of state. You know when brown loses it will be because of you? The Republicans where hoping to keep this race under raps and hoping for a low voter turn out. Good luck with that now.

Shady · January 12, 2010

Too funny!

Coakley's campaign is paying people to hold signs for her! :lol:

Pliny · January 13, 2010

The good thing is that we will soon know who has won, and who the greater deceivers are.

We won't necessarily know who the greater deceivers are, as you yourself say, polls are too easy to be fiddled with.

I have heard that the race is close. If Kennedy were running it would probably be a yawner. The fact Republicans are even said to be close is interesting.

The one thing we can agree on -- if the Republican wins in Mass ... it means the Democrats are in trouble.

Yep. It might mean the end of Obamacare.

Obama, Reid and Pelosi know what's best for Americans though. I am waiting for them to break out in chorus: "A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down."

There seems to be a bit of an allergic reaction.