Gallup, Blue states, and Red elections
posted at 3:20 pm on February 1, 2010 by Karl
Gallup has released the first part of its annual “State of the States” series, starting with a look at party identification:
Nationwide, party support shifted in a slightly more Republican direction in 2009 after a historically strong Democratic year in 2008. Overall, 49% of Americans in 2009 identified as Democrats or said they were independent but leaned to the Democratic Party, while 41% identified as Republicans or were Republican-leaning independents. That 8-point Democratic advantage compares to a 12-point, 52% to 40%, Democratic advantage in 2008.
Thus, even with the reduction in Democratic strength, the party still maintained a solid advantage over the Republicans nationally last year. It follows, then, that most states continued to be Democratic in their political orientation. (A table showing the full data for each state appears at the end of the article.)
It is important to note that the classification of states reported here is based on the political affiliations of all residents, and does not necessarily indicate how a state might vote in a given election. Also, the partisanship figures include independents who have a partisan leaning with each party’s core identifiers. This makes the states more comparable because the percentage of independents varies widely by state, and can understate a party’s true strength in a state.
The lesson of the past year — when the colors on the map looked the same as today — is how true that last paragraph is.
The obvious starting point is that Gallup’s map would give no inkling that Massachusetts has just elected its first GOP to the U.S. Senate in decades, let alone governors in Virginia and New Jersey.
The Gallup map also fails to show what lefty blogger Chris Bowers projects for the 2010 midterm elections. His most recent calculations have the Democrats losing a net of five more Senate seats, including from 11 states Gallup has colored blue — Pennsylvania, Ohio, Arkansas, Colorado, North Carolina, Kentucky, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Dakota, and Delaware. Bowers also has a grim prognosis for House Democrats:
For the first time since I began monitoring the national House ballot since October, Democrats have fallen behind. Further, they have no clar path back into the lead, as five separate polling organizations now show them facing a deficit. This includes two of the three polling outfits with weekly poll updates, Daily Kos and Rasmussen.
It would be very difficult for Democrats to maintain control of the House of Representatives when facing a deficit like this. The median error for this methodology is 1.77%. As such, given current polling, the odds of a Democratic victory in the popular vote (if the election were held tomorrow) would only 32%. Given that Republicans have an edge in current district composition (the 218th district has a Cook PVI of R+2), that Republicans will likely have an edge in total number of districts with a candidate, and that many of these polls are still measuring all adults rather than registered voters or likely voters, if anything the Republican advantage of 1.2% is an underestimation.
Of course, November is a lifetime away in politics. Events could shift the environment more in favor of the Democrats. Their best bet is that our economy recovers, despite the Democratic agenda. However, economic growth would have to equal 5 percent for all of 2010 just to lower the average jobless rate for the year by 1 percentage point. Economists find that scenario unlikely. And given the degree to which public perceptions of the economy are driven by unemployment, a reduction of 1 percent might not be enough to seriously affect public opinion of the Democrats, even if it happens.
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
These kinds of studies don’t take into account that states like Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi have Dem parties at the state level which are far removed from the national party.
If the Dem parties in those states resembled the national parties, the registration in each state would switch to bright red overnight.
teke184 on February 1, 2010 at 3:29 PM
Lets separate traditional dems from Progressive scum and see what results we get.
csdeven on February 1, 2010 at 3:32 PM
I don’t get your point. The Republican parties at the state level in blue states are also significantly different from the national party, with respect to issues like abortion or gun control. If not, it would be a bloodbath. The one point to take away would be, as everyone knows, “all politics is local”.
peter_griffin on February 1, 2010 at 3:33 PM
I can’t see economic recovery on the horizon with the progressive wing of the dim’s in power.
OmahaConservative on February 1, 2010 at 3:34 PM
This poll probably doesn’t account for the massive public pushback against Obama’s agenda of Cap and Tax, Obamacare, and the KSM trial/terrorists as criminals idiocy.
Mord on February 1, 2010 at 3:34 PM
Not to mention the EPA calling your exhalations a pollutant.
Mord on February 1, 2010 at 3:36 PM
That’ll never happen. Progressive have a strangle hold on the Democratic party that hasn’t been seen in generations. It’ll take a major political earthquake to knock them loose and make them go underground again. I’m just not sure such an earthquake is possible… unless, say, Governor Palin won in the 2012 Election.
Enoxo on February 1, 2010 at 3:37 PM
Yeah!!!! This is AWESOME. I want the lmestream media to tell al lthe democrats they are safe, safe, safe, just like Martha Coakley thought she was safe.
Hey, little democrats – everybody LOVES you – y’all just keep on doing exactly what you’re doing. Thank you.
JustTruth101 on February 1, 2010 at 3:37 PM
Exactly…because I do think there is a HUGE difference. Gallup is only fooling themselves, and those who wear the ruby slippers, click their heels together, and say…there’s nothing like hope, and change. There’s nothing like hope and change. There’s nothing like hope and change.
capejasmine on February 1, 2010 at 3:37 PM
I’m all for democrat backed polling organizations saying that the democrats are in no problem.
jukin on February 1, 2010 at 3:37 PM
I agree. When are the pollsters going to put up a graphic that shows the traditional “true” Democrat”, the Republican, and the “New Socialist/Progressive”? That would help all Americans see how much trouble we’re in as a nation when it comes to these scum-bags in D.C.
HomeoftheBrave on February 1, 2010 at 3:38 PM
Don’t you think there will be similar issues if we separate the hardcore conservatives from the RINO’s? Like it or not, (and irrespective of how much we chide AP), the moderates do have an important role to play in the blue/purple states. Just like conservatives do not always agree with the Republican party agenda, the electorate (for better or for worse), do not always agree with the (usually social) conservative agenda, and hence we need to shield moderate pols in those places.
peter_griffin on February 1, 2010 at 3:38 PM
Obowma will just print more money…
Problem solved! Vote Democrat!
/s
Seven Percent Solution on February 1, 2010 at 3:39 PM
Usually that is true, but Scott Brown, while benefiting from the fact that Massachusetts has universal health care (which made ObamaCare totally unappealing), also rode a national wave of discontent.
Moreover, national security is a national issue and Dems are going to lose big on this after they screwed up GITMO, 9/11 trials for KSM, and the knickerbomber.
Buy Danish on February 1, 2010 at 3:40 PM
You can’t remove the heart without killing the patient. They are too intertwined.
portlandon on February 1, 2010 at 3:41 PM
You’d have better luck separating the moral fascists and corporatist tools from the Republican party.
Dark-Star on February 1, 2010 at 3:42 PM
Separating progressives from the Democratic party is akin to separating conservatives from the Republican party. Their philosophical positions are exactly opposite to conservatives, and that’s what makes this a vibrant democracy. It would be a boring debate if most people agreed with your positions.
peter_griffin on February 1, 2010 at 3:42 PM
You were wrong about Scott Brown, and I think you are wrong again.
I would love to see a map with the “the folks are pissed off” factored in.
Knucklehead on February 1, 2010 at 3:43 PM
What was I wrong on about Scott Brown?
Enoxo on February 1, 2010 at 3:45 PM
“Moral fascism”? You mean like “Progressives” who push “Social Justice”?
Buy Danish on February 1, 2010 at 3:46 PM
More embarrassing will be when the media and the markets—who are propping up this false recovery—try to search for another excuse right about the end of summer. POP! That loud sound is not a champagne bottle….more like the FEDS crutches snapping.
Rovin on February 1, 2010 at 3:46 PM
I don’t see much in the way of recovery, not with Obama and company spending most of their time talking about new taxes on the wealthy and finding excuse after excuse to ramp up the spending machine even more.
MarkTheGreat on February 1, 2010 at 3:46 PM
Still on that big business is inherently evil kick I see.
MarkTheGreat on February 1, 2010 at 3:48 PM
Progressives are not just a different political ideologue, they’re quite dangerous to the simple foundation of this country and they strive to destroy it.
Democrats threw out Progressive before when they tried to take over the party, which is why they went underground trying to build back power. And those Democrats, while still different from Republicans, were fine–they just had different ideas, but still cared for this country. Progressives, however, don’t.
Enoxo on February 1, 2010 at 3:49 PM
I’m pretty sure he means those Republicans who are as eager as most Democrats to use the power of govt to control how other people live their lives.
MarkTheGreat on February 1, 2010 at 3:50 PM
The last time SC was gray was when the Northern aggressors invaded our territory.
SouthernGent on February 1, 2010 at 3:50 PM
I think you’re on the wrong thread. Those “coporatist tools” are in South Beach, with the Dems.
capejasmine on February 1, 2010 at 3:51 PM
Are you trying to tell us that, if unemployment has droppped to a mere 9%, we shouldn’t be eternally grateful to our new Democratic overlords and reelect Pelosi, Reid and their henchmen?
cool breeze on February 1, 2010 at 3:52 PM
More or less, except the progressive version is actually based on a twisted version of humanism.
Dark-Star on February 1, 2010 at 3:52 PM
Gallup says 49% D (or lean D) to 41% R (or lean R) for 2009. But at what time in 2009? The Rasmussen “generic congressional vote” favored Dems from January to June, then flipped Republican around August, and Republicans steadily widened their lead. Does Gallup’s poll “in 2009″ represent an average of the whole year (early part pro-Dem, latter part pro-GOP), or when was this taken?
Steve Z on February 1, 2010 at 3:53 PM
Notice where Arizona is on the political scale. That’s why McCain doesn’t have much to worry about from Hayworth.
RBMN on February 1, 2010 at 3:54 PM
They tried a “luxury” tax on yachts and planes all it did was put blue collar boat builders on unemployment. The eevil Bush repealed the tax.
Obama wouldn’t cut taxes on the “rich” even if you could prove to him that revenues would triple because it’s “not fair”. But he’s not an ideologue!
Buy Danish on February 1, 2010 at 3:55 PM
At the DNC convention last year. LOL
capejasmine on February 1, 2010 at 3:55 PM
Hmmm. As a result of the industry I work in, I have had a lot of conversations with those of my colleagues who claim to be “progressive”. What I realized was, most are looking for a society where people do not hate each other, and do not compete tirelessly for more resources – in short, they believe in utopia. None of them really said anything which suggested that they did not care for our country. They just came across as being naive.
peter_griffin on February 1, 2010 at 3:56 PM
When you were claiming over and over that Brown probably wouldn’t pull off the upset.
Knucklehead on February 1, 2010 at 3:57 PM
Everyone wants peace on earth. I know I do too. But you don’t go about it, by tearing down, blaming, punishing, destroying, bankrupting, and scolding an entire nation, to make it happen. Obama seems hell bent on doing all of the above, and I don’t think utopia is his goal.
capejasmine on February 1, 2010 at 3:59 PM
OT……………..
Scott Brown will be sworn in on Thursday.
Knucklehead on February 1, 2010 at 3:59 PM
And this time, I think it’s permanent. The democrats’ masks have fallen and revealed them for the redistributionists and National Socialists that they really are. And Americans don’t like it one bit.
UltimateBob on February 1, 2010 at 4:00 PM
Southern states are Democratic out of habit. They’re hardly liberal, though. Blanche Lincoln is going to get crushed in this supposedly “blue” state, probably by a hawkish, fiscally conservative social con.
NoLeftTurn on February 1, 2010 at 4:00 PM
My predictions changed with new polling that came out the day before the election, and I had Brown to win by +7.
Enoxo on February 1, 2010 at 4:02 PM
Little Barry’s going home.
txag92 on February 1, 2010 at 4:03 PM
Does this map take into account how many GOP voters will be beaten away from the voting places by union thugs and Black Panthers? That could be a mighty big swing, maybe even enough to allow a demorat victory.
Bishop on February 1, 2010 at 4:04 PM
You can also lump in people who take on faith that humanity is necessarily evolving to be more progressive.
I call them Star Trek Democrats.
TheUnrepentantGeek on February 1, 2010 at 4:04 PM
Kentucky?? Blue? I think not.
Terrye on February 1, 2010 at 4:04 PM
They bring a club, I bring a pair of steel toed boots, and well…. hee hee hee. LOL
capejasmine on February 1, 2010 at 4:08 PM
Thank you for the break down of the numbers. Appreciated! I hope 2010 is an awful year for the dems. Now if the Republicans could isolate some RINOs to cull from the herd . . . .
By the way, Karl, have we been properly introduced?
WTSherman at your service!
Well, stats and interpretation appreciated!
Sherman1864 on February 1, 2010 at 4:09 PM
Maybe Indonesia will declare him their god, and not let him come back? :D
capejasmine on February 1, 2010 at 4:10 PM
About time.
OmahaConservative on February 1, 2010 at 4:10 PM
NO NO NO NO Not toward the Republicans but more to the common sense, traditional conservative, center right, play by the rules,work hard ,people that built this country.
thmcbb on February 1, 2010 at 4:10 PM
The crucial measurement is not Gallup’s party ID, but the identification as 40% Conservative, 25% Liberal, and 35% Independent, or thereabouts. If Republicans ACT conservative, they bring out their base for elections, and if they get half the Indies, they win. If they overreach, or if Democrats pretend they’re conservative, and can paint Republicans as big spenders (as in 2006 and 2008), they can win Independents and the Liberal base. When Democrats win elections and then overreach to the Left in government, the Indies swing back to the Republicans.
Fiscal conservatism, small government, strong foreign and military policy, and smart energy policy win elections. But then, whoever governs must do what they promised, stay on-message, and display competence, without overreaching or being corrupted by lobbyists and bribes.
Democrats have offered plenty of rope to hang themselves (politically) in 2010, and Republicans can easily gain seats in both houses, with a good chance of taking the majority in the House. The proof of the pudding will be how they handle their part in divided government in 2011-12, and how well they stick to their priciples. They can always say “we tried, but the Senate Democrats and Obama blocked us” in 2012, but they also have to come up with serious proposals and be willing to make pragmatic agreements with reasonable Democrats to “get something done” for this argument to be credible with the electorate.
Where is the Second Contract With America?
Steve Z on February 1, 2010 at 4:11 PM
OT:Reid Schedules Vote on Controversial Labor Nominee Before Brown Arrives
OmahaConservative on February 1, 2010 at 4:12 PM
These #s seemingly fly in the face of the more than 2:1 who identify as “conservative” now. So we now have a large % of Dems saying they are “conservative”? I seriously doubt it, since they think that is a Republican position only, but that has to be what is going on? Anyone?
JAM on February 1, 2010 at 4:16 PM
Ditto for Ohio.
We’ll see how ‘blue’ our respective states are after November, especially after Ohio rids itself of ACORN’s favorite SoS.
Senator Rob Portman sounds especially nice.
CPT. Charles on February 1, 2010 at 4:16 PM
A point of order, if you will.
They are NOT “Progressives.”
They named themselves “Progressives” to sound more… well, progressive. After all, who can argue with Progress?
Those who do are dodgy clingers to outdated concepts (uh, like self-determination??) and… see where that path leads?
But, for some reason, everyone, even the loyal opposition, has been suckered into using the term to apply to people who want to turn your daily life over to the government and have you look to the government for your sustenance. Who creates jobs? Why, the government, of course. Who do you call when you have a sniffle? Why, the government, of course. Who do you call when you want to make a bank loan you money you can’t afford to pay back to buy a house you can’t possibly afford to keep? Why, the government, of course (see, e.g., “Community Organizer” with ACORN cross-reference).
Can we lose the “Progressive” tag for lefty Democrats now running the White House, the Dem party and the Dem Congress?
At least it would be a start toward truly defining the debate now raging throughout this land over the future direction of the nation.
Or, maybe they’re right. If we become Progressively Deeper in Debt, Progressively Less Employed, Progressively More Dependent on Government. Progressively Less Relevant to the Lives of Main Street Americans.
Okay. Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe they’ve hit it on the head.
As things get Progressively Worse, let them wear the label they created.
IndieDogg on February 1, 2010 at 4:20 PM
Oh crap.
What’s next, passing healthcare tonight?
Knucklehead on February 1, 2010 at 4:28 PM
“The Gallup map also fails to show what lefty blogger Chris Bowers projects for the 2010 midterm elections. His most recent calculations have the Democrats losing a net of five more Senate seats, including from 11 states Gallup has colored blue — Pennsylvania, Ohio, Arkansas, Colorado, North Carolina, Kentucky, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Dakota, and Delaware.”
..being a firm believer in the lib/MSM echo chamber phenomenon, this is a good thing. We need to keep these blue types sedated and tranquil, and egnaged in erotic wet dreams about their beloved messiah..
..only to awaken to the massive buzz kill that will eventuate on the first Tuesday in November of this year and in 2012.
VoyskaPVO on February 1, 2010 at 4:30 PM
JAM, your answer is ‘selection bias’. No poll is ever right, nor any story predicated on a single example. You have to look at everything and factor it in. And that means far more than just the polling firms.
rayra on February 1, 2010 at 4:30 PM
After reading of Wahhabism and the First Amendment, Jennifer Rubin’s critique of Palin caught my eye.
The Democrat Party is the party of those who have determined that they will be the neo-aristocratic ruling class in the Marxist world: Progressives, and from the statistics, Jews who evidently agree with Marxism so long as it benefits them. These Jewish Democrat intellectuals are not agrarian Jeffersonian Democrats or they’d be tolerant of Palin’s background.
Jennifer Rubin explicates Why Jews Hate Palin. In a nutshell, because they want to hate her for being what they don’t want to be, most significantly for being successful without having become like they are. Mean spirited snobs. And as such, they will NOT permit her to stand on her own record, having chosen to paint her as they have via their “informed media”. Ironic, for supposedly valuing “intelligence” to be a glutton consuming their own propaganda.
No need to castigate this entry as antisemitic. Read Rubin for yourself.
And so far as Palin is concerned, I’ve consistently stated support for her, but with the stated premise that she really must devote some years doing scholarly research to hone her instincts with more education in order to have adroit and concise answers (not simplistic) to complicated questions. Palin’s political talents are as a mother hen, and she loves being out with people. Her fund-raising ability and support for her causes are admirable. That is wonderful in the effort to unite conservatives and strengthen effective coalitions. But even here, doing what is polite or expected is not the same as doing what is best for the conservative agenda. Finally, to successfully face down the likes of Putin, Wen Jiabao, Kim Jong Il, Ahmadinejad, Abdullah, et al. requires more than good hunting skills and generosity of spirit if we are to survive this new decade. Palin’s brilliant instincts are showing up in whom she endorses; McCain and Rick Perry. I am not impressed by those choices.
From her book Going Rogue, Palin confessed having sabotaged her mother-in-law’s own political campaign, excusing her own jealous vanity in the family on her desire to support someone from her political past association.
Déjà vu. In Texas, Debra Medina is the strong conservative choice for Governor, much more informed on Constitutional means to protect our State and our citizens than Rick Perry is, and Medina will cut taxes (no income tax, no property tax, just consumer tax); for individual Constitutional rights and liberty that Perry/Hutchison knew nothing about in televised debate; for securing state identification ONLY for legal residents and citizens of Texas, NOT for illegals–hence nip the corrupt ID for employment in the bud rather than propagating a wastefully expensive and ineffective new bureaucracy in DHSe-verify; and specifically stating her means to eliminate the corruption and fraud within our state government agencies including TX-DOT and exorbitant toll roads.
Texas does not want the Washingtonian chicken coming home to roost. Nor does Texas deserve more taxes on small businesses and depleted employment for citizens as occurred under Perry’s “experienced” in corruption administration in 2009. Next to Medina, in comparison Perry is the Kick-back man who only sides with the crowd of common working folk in front of cameras between closed door meetings with globalists who have the exploitation of Texas and Texans as their goal.
maverick muse on February 1, 2010 at 4:37 PM
535 members. A couple hundred Republicans. They ain’t all saints. I guarantee you there will be a scandal in the Fall targeting the GOP that the Media will hammer home day in and day out.
I GUARANTEE IT.
Democrat, get more facts. Edwards wouldn’t cheat on his wife.
Republican. Oh my, he was picking up men in the Airport restroom!!! SCANDAL!!!
James on February 1, 2010 at 4:39 PM
And the Ft. Hood shooting, which for odd reason, NO ONE talks about.
Schadenfreude on February 1, 2010 at 4:43 PM
IndieDogg
Heh, Progressives. Like “gay” and so much of our vocabulary ruined by revisionism, “progressive” always sounded so modernly smart. Too bad it was usurped by Marxists along their route.
maverick muse on February 1, 2010 at 4:49 PM
Schadenfreude on February 1, 2010 at 4:43 PM
Michael W. Schwartz is talking about it, “Wahhabism and the First Amendment.”
There’s a great article by John Bolton over there as well, “Obama’s Next Three Years.”
maverick muse on February 1, 2010 at 4:55 PM
And even stranger is how no one mentioned that fact that Barry didn’t even introduce the hero’s at the SOTU speech.
Knucklehead on February 1, 2010 at 4:57 PM
Yes, it hard to believe that traditional Democrats are happy with the direction the Far-left National Socialist moonbats are taking the party and the country.
Colbyjack on February 1, 2010 at 5:00 PM
Thanks for the reminder!
Buy Danish on February 1, 2010 at 5:01 PM
I respectfully disagree.
The Progressives have always been on the same train as the Marxists.
All they did was craft a better ‘message’ and push them out the Fireman’s seat.
The labels mean nothing; the tracks they’re on lead to the exact same destination.
CPT. Charles on February 1, 2010 at 5:05 PM
The stupidest Utopian ideological bs I’ve read in a loooong time. I did rejoice in Mr. Fineman’s sorrow, though.
What a difference a night in Massachusetts makes!
Schadenfreude on February 1, 2010 at 5:16 PM
It’s hard to know what to hope for. At the rate of damage we now have,to blindly keep on keeping on is bad for the country, good for electing conservatives.
Looks like they are doubling down, our hopes don’t matter much to them.
jodetoad on February 1, 2010 at 5:16 PM
Sorry, s/b Mr. Friedman.
Schadenfreude on February 1, 2010 at 5:17 PM
This study indicates that Democrats are perfectly safe in their seats. Keep pushing the O-Agenda – the people want it. LOL
The people are particularly fond of the Health Care bill and the way it tastes as it’s rammed down their throats. More of that please. Oh – and we’re all lovin’ the spending – keep that stuff comin’ we’re solidly behind you folks in the next election! :P
Nothing to see here.
HondaV65 on February 1, 2010 at 5:26 PM
+++1000!!
lovingmyUSA on February 1, 2010 at 5:26 PM
Remember “adults” versus likely voters in these polls, folks. Lefties love alienation, but alienation doesn’t get Cousin Pookie to the polls.
Sekhmet on February 1, 2010 at 5:29 PM
I don’t know how my liver is going to hold up until then….
lovingmyUSA on February 1, 2010 at 5:32 PM
If you thought Dems were nasty campaigners before, we ain’t seen noth’n yet.
Speakup on February 1, 2010 at 5:39 PM
You were right–that article was a load of crap. By the end of the article, I wanted to offer him some cheese to go with his whine…To think that this man is over there representing the US to others…What a loser!
lovingmyUSA on February 1, 2010 at 5:46 PM
What a pile of crap. Gallup has Georgia as a toss up state! WTF? Apparently the Gallup idiots didn’t back check their polling methods with a dose of reality.
David in ATL on February 1, 2010 at 5:56 PM
The poll does not seem to note that independents are trending 2 to 1 republican this year…
JIMV on February 1, 2010 at 6:09 PM
To call Oklahoma a non-Red state just shows how slanted this “poll” is. We have 2 Republican senators, most of our reps are Republican, the state congress is Republican majority. The mayors of Tulsa and OK City (by far the two largest cities) are Republican and we voted 60+ Republican vs. 30+% Obama in the 2008 Presidential Election. We do have a Democrat governor who only got to the position by legalizing gambling in the state.
Christian Conservative on February 1, 2010 at 6:56 PM
FYI the Ohio governorship race is coming. John Kasich (R) will challenge the current Democratic Governor Strickland. Keep an eye on this one and your support of Kasich would be appreciated. Kasich is a stand up guy and will work for the people. His site is here and this would be another great chance to send the Dems a message.
http://blog.kasichforohio.com/
CWforFreedom on February 1, 2010 at 7:03 PM
These kinds of studies don’t take into account that states like Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi have Dem parties at the state level which are far removed from the national party.
True. I’m technically registered to vote as a Democrat due to the state party system being what it is.
And, my friends, I am damned sure no Democrat.
JoeinTX on February 1, 2010 at 7:14 PM
The real question here is how many of those “competitive” states have democrat secretaries of state. Those are the folks who call elections, and dems have been gobbling up those seemingly “inconsequential” elected posts for years. In a close election, like in Minnesota, a democrat secretary of state will refuse to call it until enough votes have been “found” (again, like Minnesota). As I recall, George Soros is funding a state-by-state effort to get democrats elected to these posts in toss-up states. Imagine if the Massachusetts Senate race had been close…
Rational Thought on February 1, 2010 at 7:21 PM
Chuck DeVore can beat Boxer in California. He’s close to goal for today’s money bomb. If you’d like to get Senator Ma’am out of office, please help DeVore.
NTWR on February 1, 2010 at 7:49 PM
Something I’ve always wondered about (but not enough to try to find out why) is why Democrats are blue and Republicans are red. Makes no sense to me. I would think Democrats should be red, or maybe pink or rainbow. And Republicans should be green. Green for the GO in GOP, for the green money behind prosperity, and for the prosperity that brings about green environmental improvments. Also, in nautical terms, red is for port (or left) and green is for starboard (or right). Green = GOP. Red or Pink = commie pinko Dems. Much easier for me to keep straight.
starboardhelm on February 1, 2010 at 7:51 PM
Not citizens?
nyx on February 1, 2010 at 8:31 PM
Wyoming most Republican state? Well I live in Wyoming and I am Republican. Yep, sounds about right!
WyoMike on February 1, 2010 at 10:49 PM
Dick Morris was on Hannity tonite predicting that ELEVEN senate seats would flip this fall, and the Rs would win the House by at least 10 seats (I don’t exactly remember the House seat number, frankly I believe it is going to be a huge 55+ seat swing in the House).
However, Dick didn’t list the 11 seats in the Senate he expects to flip.
We have PA, DE, WI, AR, ND, and NV that look really interesting.
I think the MO dem is down in the polls, CA might be a competitive race, and possibly IL.
That makes 9, taking it to an even 50 50 with Biden breaking ties. So what other states are in play? Is LA electing a new senator? Is the FL senator that is retiring an R or D?
karenhasfreedom on February 2, 2010 at 1:41 AM
Ah, just remembered that Bayh in IN is vulnerable. So that makes 10. Which state is the possible #11? Since Dodd retired, I have heard that the Dem is outpolling any R challengers, there.
karenhasfreedom on February 2, 2010 at 1:46 AM
Colorado, forgot Colorado. So scratch LA, not the year to defeat Landrieu. So perhaps NY? MO is a retiring R, so not that state.
So in summary, are these the seats that the R’s can pick up?
PA
CO
NV
WI
AR
ND
DE
IL
CA ?
IN
NY Gilliland
Interesting in that all of the polling experts listed over at WIKI have IN in the very safe Dem category. I think the tea party movement is going to bite him in the ass this year, possibly.
karenhasfreedom on February 2, 2010 at 2:13 AM
I’m not entirely sure that the standard thinking will hold this year. People watched as their blue dog Dems ignored their wishes on HCR. That may really be the tipping point for a lot of voters. They may see that the Dem candidate will be over-pressured on an agenda with which they don’t agree and go GOP to be safe.
AnninCA on February 2, 2010 at 7:44 AM
Yeah, with a majority of state Republicans in congress, senate and a popular Republican governor, I don’t see Georgia as a toss up. Karen Handel (Sec of State) is also in the red column, heck EVEN RINO McCain got 52% of the 2008 vote. I think Gallup is blowing smoke.
DanaSmiles on February 2, 2010 at 7:55 AM