Nutroots set to declare moral victory in Connecticut; Update: Dems have 10 seats locked up?
posted at 3:21 pm on October 24, 2006 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
No sense waiting. The longer they wait, the more pathetic it’ll look.
The alleged moral victory here is that the Freshmaker proved to the party intelligentsia that you can win by running against the war, a lesson they simply wouldn’t have learned had not the nutroots spurred him on to victory in Connecticut. Never mind stuff like this:
The DNC is simply too stupid to track trends in the most important issue there is to voters and adjust their national tactics accordingly. They needed proof that this strategy was a winner, which Lamont delivered by taking the primary — against a notoriously hawkish candidate who’s trouncing him in the general election in one of the bluest states in the country.
So there’s your moral victory.
More poll fun from Gallup:
The percentage of Democrats who describe themselves as “extremely” or “very” motivated has actually declined by 1% since June. On the Republican side, it’s increased by 4% — although that’s at least partly offset by the increase in “not at all motivated” voters.
With left and right in balance it’s the independents who’ll decide things, and that’s where the nutroots has the last laugh. PIPA noted the trend among independents recently, too:
Majority Watch says the Dems are poised to take the House, with as much as a 20-seat margin if everything breaks their way. That certainly fits wth WaPo’s “wave” projection. As for the Senate, Taegan Goddard boils it down to three races: Missouri, Tennessee, and Virginia. I’d add Montana in there, since Conrad Burns has pulled to within three points or so of Jon Tester.
The latest polls at RCP have the GOP winning two of those. Which would make it 50-50.
Dan Riehl’s putting on a brave face, but Byron York and the New York Sun are hammering that panic button for all it’s worth.
Update: 10 seats locked up, 45 in play? Uh oh.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
We have moral superiority,you stole the election,no Mumia for oil,blah blah balh yadda yadda yoo.I still think that the Republicans will soundly trounce the party of whiners.
bbz123 on October 24, 2006 at 3:27 PM
In September RFK jr came out in the interveiw shows proclaiming the voting machines were rigged.
In Ca they (progressives) adopted the ‘voters rights’ statement.
ABC recently did a story on voter machine fraud.
(all this 30 days before the election).
Both sides a lawyering up. Period. IF THE POLLS ARE WRONG…….and of course ‘how could they be?’…..the dems are getting ready to make this 2000 and the Mexican election X ten. Watch.
If they can’t win at the ballot box then they will DO ANYTHING TO WIN IN THE COURTS.
Limerick on October 24, 2006 at 3:29 PM
Tweak tweak tweak. Just can’t seem to get it right.
xardoz on October 24, 2006 at 3:29 PM
Dick Morris said this morning on the Bill Handel show, that would the election be held today, the conservatives would hold both sides.
In politics there are no moral victories, just wins and losses – someone notify the netroots.
Entelechy on October 24, 2006 at 3:30 PM
I may be alone on this, but I think all the press that the Democrats are getting about taking the House and Senate are a good thing for Republicans.
The very idea of the Democrats running the country will (in my opinion) will motivate the Republican base to vote. It may lull the Dem’s into complacency and allow them to feel like they can stay home instead of voting.
E L Frederick on October 24, 2006 at 3:31 PM
Time for a new Blaster?
xardoz on October 24, 2006 at 3:32 PM
Here is an article with Dick Morris’ analysis that Drudge has put in caps:
http://www.vote.com/magazine/columns/dickmorris/column60420992.phtml
This is looking bad for Dems/Dims/Dhims. They are panicking and bracing for defeat by now stating that voting machines are rigged and shouting “racism.”
What a transparent stategy:
1. Have Democrat friendly polls give bogus results for Dems for months on end before the election.
2. Have every MSM outlet run negative story after negative story in order to suppress conservative turnout.
3. When turnout is high and conservatives win (Dems having hoped that the bogus polls, liberals candidates like Ford pretending to be conservative, and negative stories like Foley would have suppressed the vote), then claim Republicans have rigged voting machines because of the polls showing Dems were winning.
Libs have no morals, no ideas, and no shame.
januarius on October 24, 2006 at 3:39 PM
Barron’s has an interesting take and they reach the same conclusion…except they’re talking about 11/7.
The Dems still have two more weeks to shoot themselves in the foot. :-)
Pablo on October 24, 2006 at 3:40 PM
I also think the MSM is pushing the idea of a Republican trouncing too much. I would imagine the Republican base, even the foolish ones who’re threatening to stay home and ‘give the Republicans what they deserve’ are getting incensed at a Democratic landslide being taken for granted. How many times have elections been called weeks and months beforehand, only to have the voters flip at the last second.
I’m still feeling positive that we’ll keep at least the Senate.
dalewalt on October 24, 2006 at 3:43 PM
Last week, I was sure the republicans would lose both. This week, I’m sure it’ll be a toss up. Things seem to be trending against democrats, as far as coverage goes, etc.
I think the democrats shot their wad a little too soon. Declared victory too soon and the media followed suit.
It’s the same problem they will face in 08. Throwing Obama out there 2 years ahead of time? A bit early. Again, shooting the wad a little too early.
Democrats have a good game, plan. attack attack attack, but they do it too soon. Republicans have a poor game plan. defend defend defend, but they do it all the time and are good at it.
lorien1973 on October 24, 2006 at 3:50 PM
Many more moral victories to follow. Leaves the actual victories and governing to the adults.
Drew Bledsoe had a moral victory last night.
Parcells took him out before the Giants left
him for dead on the field.
JammieWearingFool on October 24, 2006 at 3:53 PM
Here’s a real MNF haiku:
TO dropped the ball
Parcells dropped the QB next
Giants came out first.
lorien1973 on October 24, 2006 at 3:58 PM
All that needs to be done is put up any pic of Pelosi.That scares people,and I don’t care who you are.Her eyes just can’t shut anymore,the budget for visine alone must be astronomical.
bbz123 on October 24, 2006 at 3:59 PM
Jammie and Lorien…………..could you PLEASE convince Jerry Jones and TO to move to San Francisco…pleaseeeeeeee…….
(disgruntled Texan)
Limerick on October 24, 2006 at 4:00 PM
I think the Dem voter suprression stuff is gonna backfire.
They peaked really early, and now they’re trying to maintain. But its not gonna happen.
The media can’t hide the 12000+ DOW and falling gas prices.
Repubs have to go out and say we got the Economy up and Gas prices down.
They’ve got to play hardball with the Dems too. Like trying to expell someone over NIE etc.
Iblis on October 24, 2006 at 4:04 PM
I’m not sure they should mention that gas prices are down; the gasoline prices fluctuate according to market forces, not the whims of the party currently in power. Educate the masses now, otherwise if/when prices go back up, it’ll be the same old “Bush lowered prices for the election, and now is pushing them back up for his oil industry cronies”
dalewalt on October 24, 2006 at 4:13 PM
For whatever it’s worth, Instapundit’s poll (insert usual disclaimers about internet polls) has over 5000 votes, with 56% saying Republicans keep both houses, 37% one house, and 7% lose both houses.
Also, a visitor to my blog claims that trandesports.com, which has no impeachment contracts yet, is going to have them soon.
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on October 24, 2006 at 4:14 PM
Uh, tradesports.com.
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on October 24, 2006 at 4:15 PM
Lamont’s first problem is his name. He’s a “Ned”…
This is not a good thing to be. Trust me.
His second problem is his overly vocal supporters – they’re not from his state, mostly. Carpetbaggers, Maw! Git the squirrel gun!
mojo on October 24, 2006 at 4:15 PM
If I were Bush, for the next 2 weeks, I’d hit economy, economy, economy. GOP should buy ad time for Larry Elder’s ad too.
lorien1973 on October 24, 2006 at 4:15 PM
If only Karl Rove was the evil genius they think he is.
Where’s that October Surprise?
John on October 24, 2006 at 4:18 PM
For years the Donks have claimed they are the party of “moral values.” Now they can enjoy their moral victories.
In the words of Al Davis: Just win, baby!
(He also said, “the quarterback must go down and he must go down hard.” I’m not sure but I think Lamont would qualify as the quarterback.)
Mallard T. Drake on October 24, 2006 at 4:19 PM
I’d love to see Osama “frogwalked” out of Gitmo for the press.
E L Frederick on October 24, 2006 at 4:20 PM
As George Will said in reference to all the troubles facing the republicans right now:
“If…the Democrats cannot gain 13 seats, they should go into another line of work.”
What are the talking heads going to say if the Republicans do hold on to the House and the Senate? That will just be really fun to watch.
Zetterson on October 24, 2006 at 4:22 PM
Yep. Every close GOP win will be challenged in the courts. These people don’t give a flip about the will of the people, they just want to be in power. And they won’t be playing by the rules.
infidel4life on October 24, 2006 at 4:29 PM
They’ll say the Republicans stole another election. And this is the first time in PA for the electronic voting machines; so if Santorum happens to win…
dalewalt on October 24, 2006 at 4:29 PM
As has been par for the course for over 10 years now, we are seeing the Republican Surge begin, poll numbers will begin to go up for republican candidates, and the MSM will begin to prepare us for yet another democratic loss.
Keep the crow recipees ready, and don’t forget to VOTE!
DannoJyd on October 24, 2006 at 4:30 PM
The MSM continues to “Sex up” reports of the good fortune of Democratic candidates. Its clear who they want to win the elections.
Oddly may slightly backfire in that it may motivate Republicans to not sit back and let the dems take over. And fill the dems with overconfidence.
William Amos on October 24, 2006 at 4:32 PM
If you don’t vote, don’t b*tch about the outcome.
This is a very important mid-term. Everyone should get out there and “Get’er done”
BobK on October 24, 2006 at 4:57 PM
I read that libertarians might be encouraged to go vote for democrats, but if that were to happen it would show that libertarians are actually liberal lite.
I continue to predict that republicans will keep both houses of congress, and I must now leave for the VRWC meeting so that I get my marching orders as I am actually working to make it happen.
DannoJyd on October 24, 2006 at 5:00 PM
“10 seats locked up, 45 in play?”
Only in Rahm Emanuel’s dreams…
If the Democrats do NOT will both Houses, I predict that the nutroots will do a political “Jonestown”. They’ll throw a tantrum, rail against the “dirty repugs”, claim the election was stolen (what else is new), and possibly threaten violence by taking to the streets ala Mexico.
Just remember, Libs, you can’t have a fun “Jonestown” party without GRAPE KOOL-AID in the punch bowl.
georgej on October 24, 2006 at 5:03 PM
I’ve been listening to Sean Hannity; he’s had SecDef, SecState, Karl Rove, and now VP Cheney on (for a few minutes each). FWIW, they’re all stating that they’re confident on the outcome of election day.
VP Cheney is saying he thinks Rep. Pelosi ‘helps our cause’ with all of her blathering as of late (my phrase, not his).
dalewalt on October 24, 2006 at 5:12 PM
What, pray tell, does
even mean? Doesn’t toss-up inherently mean you can be sure of the outcome?
Maybe the (R) October Surprise is that there won’t be a big surprise. Like the “shock and awe” that wasn’t. Maybe Rove is counting on the Dems to continue to damage themselves with their overreaching and outright dementia.
urbancenturion on October 24, 2006 at 5:13 PM
I love to see the Hamster act so desparate!
EF on October 24, 2006 at 5:17 PM
Hey, if they get blamed for the gas price increase, they should take credit for the decrease. Win first. They can do the educatin’ later.
Iblis on October 24, 2006 at 5:20 PM
Good thing I bought all that ammo last month.
quax1 on October 24, 2006 at 5:20 PM
Count me as an “terribly extremely motivated voter”…can’t wait to vote straight ticket Republican for the first time.
Normally I keep an open mind about the candidates in the local races,as we sometimes get a decent democrat in races without a republican……not this year….I’m going straight R.
quax1 on October 24, 2006 at 5:23 PM
“Moral victory” means two things. And the first one is jack.
ReubenJCogburn on October 24, 2006 at 5:29 PM
“I read that libertarians might be encouraged to go vote for democrats, but if that were to happen it would show that libertarians are actually liberal lite.” – DannoJyd
I’m sorry if you mistook Libertarian for “Republican Base” but that isn’t really the definition. “Liberal lite” or “Conservative lite” is a lot closer to the truth.
You see, most Libertarians want two things. Fiscal Conservatism, and Social Liberalism (or “Government out of my pocketbook and my lifestyle”). For major policy points, when considering other parties, we like about half of each.
Which major point is the current Republican Administration helping with? Neither. Democrats can’t do the Fiscal Conservatism, but they tend to promote the Social Liberalism side. The Republicans have neither side at this point, if this is “Fiscal Conservatism” then the Dems have nothing on the Reps regarding overspending.
The Republicans can count on the Libertarian Hawks (because the Democrats on Defense is creepy), but the Doves and undecided have no real reason to favor Republicans?
I suspect many Libertarians will vote for the (L) candidate this year, which may make it the best year in quite some time for the Libertarian vote %. Maybe even enough to make some of the state’s limits on who is allowed in the public debates…
Is that “liberal lite”? If you feel like calling that, go ahead.
gekkobear on October 24, 2006 at 5:57 PM
Early voting opened in FL today, and I went and handled my business. I urge all my Sunshine State compadres to go and do likewise.
Kid from Brooklyn on October 24, 2006 at 6:32 PM
I saw Bush today in Sarasota, a visit to support Vern Buchanan for Congress. He gave a great speech, much of it about the economy and jobs (all good), but he also covered the war on terror and the need for a good offense against it, even using that “caliphate” word.
And then he went in to what would happen under a Democratic House, such as say buh-bye to the tax cuts he passed.
There was a good turnout of ticket-buying supporters, a strong contrast to the lame turnout of moonbatty protesters. I gotta say I’m feeling better about the Republicans holding both houses at his point.
Im_no_dhimmi on October 24, 2006 at 6:41 PM
MOst political prognosticators have 8-12 GOP seats leaning Dem, with another 20 in the Toss Up area. Usually 80% of Toss Ups break the same way.
E5infantry on October 24, 2006 at 7:08 PM
When pundits so often talk about the “base” of the party and people not being motivatd for thier own party…when you think about it what this is really revealing is there is an underlying problem with our 2 party system. The problem is there are (at least) 4 basic policy perspectives and these are crammed into only 2 parties, meaning half the people are probably never really going to even like thier own party.
social liberal fiscal liberal (Democrat?)
social concervatism fiscal liberal (Green?)
social liberal fiscal conservative (Libertarian?)
social concervative fiscal concervative (Rebublican?)
Resolute on October 24, 2006 at 7:28 PM
I think Gore Vidal said it best: “It isn’t enough that someone wins, others must lose”. There are no “moral” victories in politics.
thedecider on October 24, 2006 at 7:51 PM
gekkobear wrote:
I find it hard to describe libertarianism as “lite” in any capacity. Libertarians are not socially liberal. They are, however, far left of the Democrats in terms of personal freedoms, and that is due to an inherent faith in purely free markets, which is actually an ideal of the right. Libertarians do not advocate drug use or prostitution, for example, but they believe in the right of consenting adults to engage in such behavior if they so choose.
The war on terrorism and Iraq has split genuine libertarians right down the middle. I cannot believe that any libertarian would vote Democratic, particularly after the horrifying Kelo decision on property rights, which was approved without blush from the left side of the bench.
RoveOnVacation on October 24, 2006 at 8:18 PM
Here’s a chilling thought, and something I jus discovered.
From the Peter du Pont’s OpinionJournal column:
Pelosi is going to give the chairmanship of the INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE TO AN IMPEACHED AND CONVICTED BRIBE TAKER AND PERJURER!
georgej on October 25, 2006 at 12:43 AM
georgej, in a sane world, that crook wouldn’t be allowed to have a security clearance, let alone get anywhere near classified material. (Of course, in a sane world nobody gives the fox the keys to the henhouse by putting Alcee Hastings in office.) The fact that a person is vulnerable to financial exploitation is and should be big disqualifier. Sandy Burglar just stole secrets–Hastings is the kind of guy who’d sell them to the highest bidder. But the security types who’ve no doubt been saying that all along will be overruled for political reasons. It’s a travesty.
ReubenJCogburn on October 25, 2006 at 11:34 AM
Comment pages: