Political Wire
Oh my: Obama might lose Oregon this time, says … Democratic rep
Said DeFazio: “I’ve just done six town hall meetings, have seven to go but people are shaking their head and saying ‘I don’t know if I’d vote for him again.’”
He added: “One guy asked me… give me 25 words what he’s about and what he’s done for me. I’m like… ‘it could have been worse?”
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
Not out of the realm of possibility (W very nearly carried the state in 2000) but 2010 showed us that it’s not likely happening.
We had a fantastic gubernatorial nominee last year and he came up short to a burned-out retread former governor (shades of Jerry Brown, anyone?) with a live-in girlfriend, we couldn’t recruit anyone big to challenge Ron Wyden and got demolished, and certified lunatic David Wu held his seat. The Oregon GOP just ain’t what it used to be.
KingGold on August 19, 2011 at 11:42 AM
Follow-up question:
How?
WashJeff on August 19, 2011 at 11:42 AM
DeFazio represents an ultra-liberal district. If his constituents are unhappy with Obama, they’re not likely to jump to the Tea Party and they certainly won’t vote for the Republican candidate.
jwolf on August 19, 2011 at 11:43 AM
What about all of those big achievements the media was so excited about in 2008-09? Just because they are punchlines now doesn’t mean you can’t talk about them.
forest on August 19, 2011 at 11:43 AM
True, but they might go smoke doobs and play hacky sack instead of going to campaign and vote for him.
forest on August 19, 2011 at 11:45 AM
BTW I love how articulate this congressman is.
jwolf on August 19, 2011 at 11:45 AM
IIRC, OR is as brain-dead as MA most of the time.
They will knee-jerk in any libtard that talks pretty.
roy_batty on August 19, 2011 at 11:46 AM
I’m driving to Oregon next week, and my brother warned me that the speed limit on all the highways that aren’t interstates is still 55 mph. WTF?
Mark1971 on August 19, 2011 at 11:47 AM
That pretty much sums it up. “We avoid another Great Depression.” That’s his entire campaign narrative. Don’t blame me, it could’ve been worse.
Doughboy on August 19, 2011 at 11:48 AM
The lefties up here, believe it or not are Hope & Change’d out.
The economy is hurting the far lefts pet projects, and they are screaming mad.
The Teachers in the Teachers union feel Obama has betrayed them. No matter what the union reps say.
The only thing the libs have going for them is that Oregon is a mail in ballot state.
Obama might still be worth a stamp, but they sure won’t stand in line to vote for him.
portlandon on August 19, 2011 at 11:48 AM
Wasn’t Oregon a fairly close state in 2004?
Norwegian on August 19, 2011 at 11:51 AM
It’s unlikely that the GOP will actually win; the bigger point is that, if the GOP candidate is running competitively in Oregon, the race is already over.
HitNRun on August 19, 2011 at 11:53 AM
The USPS should be in bankruptcy by Nov 2012.
WashJeff on August 19, 2011 at 11:55 AM
So the “Obama is not left enough” camp.
Yep, pretty much like Cambridge MA and much of Vermont.
roy_batty on August 19, 2011 at 11:55 AM
If Oregon flips, that takes my most conservative estimate on the E.V. calculator to 299 Rep, 239 Obama.
RadClown on August 19, 2011 at 12:01 PM
I don’t want the douchebag to out of the 100′s in electoral votes.
SouthernGent on August 19, 2011 at 12:02 PM
I think many of these Democrats are saying this as a threat to the President. I don’t think they really believe he will lose OR or NY or any other blue state. This is just their way of issuing a “warning” to him.
Democrats are not Republicans. It doesn’t matter how unhappy they are with their elected officials, they will always go vote and they will always for for the Dem. Because to them, a sucky Democrat is better than any Republican. They would never risk a Republican getting elected.
ramrants on August 19, 2011 at 12:09 PM
Here’s a much better calculator: http://www.270towin.com/
Greek Fire on August 19, 2011 at 12:11 PM
hogwash…these kool-aid drinkers will vote for him in 2012…
cmsinaz on August 19, 2011 at 12:18 PM
Oregon is a deeply conservative place with a couple of liberal cancers killing it. Conservative candidates would have been doing very well except for the hideous hold the Dorchester mob of striped trouser types have had on the GOP for nearly half a century. The pro-abortion dunce they tried to sell as the Republican candidate for governor last time is par for the course.
We are intelligent, hard working folks who have too long been suffering the contempt of those who consider themselves our betters in Portland and Eugene, and we only wish that those folks would kindly go to hell and let us get on with our true character as sons of the empire builders here this golden west.
Scribbler on August 19, 2011 at 12:23 PM
And this is different from our side how?
After all, many (maybe most) folks here would vote for Romney if it came down to it.
And if he’s not a sucky Republican I don’t know who is.
Bat Chain Puller on August 19, 2011 at 12:31 PM
He may already be planning on losing Ohio
KeepOhioRed on August 19, 2011 at 12:34 PM
A decade ago, I could see this might lead to something. Bush lost the state by 0.5% in 2000. But Obama won by more than 16% last time around. Even with big losses, OR is still going blue by at least 5%
Kelligan on August 19, 2011 at 12:34 PM
There is no scenario that envisions people reporting to the polls with nearly the type of enthusiasm they had in 2008. Could these people realistically sell Obama to the public given this candidate’s record of incompetence?
Whatever fantasy voters had in their head in 2008 when they cast their vote will not be there, and what will get Obama to 45% of the vote is whatever scary scenarios the Dums cook up and sling at the GOP nominee.
Greek Fire on August 19, 2011 at 12:47 PM
Ohio is gone. Indiana is gone. Virginia is gone.
NH, CO, NM, FL? These are the states to watch.
Missy on August 19, 2011 at 12:49 PM
Big deal. The Oregon GOP used to be Senators Mark Hatfield and Bob Packwood, and before that Senator Wayne Morse, who eventually became a Democrat. Heh.
Emperor Norton on August 19, 2011 at 12:52 PM
A candidate could conceivable lose Ohio but still win. Because since Grover Cleveland, it
happened… twice. Why do you think so many presidents are from Ohio?
Greek Fire on August 19, 2011 at 12:58 PM
Obama won by 16% because Portlanders fell in love with the idea that they could demonstrate how committed they are to diversity by voting for Obama. (Portland is the least black big city in the country, and is filled with liberals who worship diversity while carefully choosing to live in a city that has very little diversity.)
This time, not so much, the economy is absolutely miserable here – I should have taken a picture yesterday of a pickup truck I saw in Portland that had half an Obama sticker ripped off.
I think that Obama may well lose Oregon, but that’s because I think Obama is going to lose in a landslide because of the economy. There’s no point for the R’s to put resources into Oregon – if Oregon is close in the election, Obama is toast anyway.
Realist on August 19, 2011 at 1:11 PM
Leftie slogan for 2012 “It could have been worth”.
Go for it, fools.
Schadenfreude on August 19, 2011 at 1:17 PM
San Francisco’s African-American population is lower (6.1%, 2010 census).
Kennedy (1960) and Roosevelt (1944).
Emperor Norton on August 19, 2011 at 1:28 PM
Good post. The Dems will be spending so much money defending blue territory that they can kiss the swing states goodbye – and then it’s all over. Unless something comes to turn it around – but right now, I can’t see what that thing would be. Short of that, it could well be a landslide.
Missy on August 19, 2011 at 1:48 PM
Kennedy is a bad example since Illinois was stolen with money from his dad.
honsy on August 19, 2011 at 1:56 PM
Without Illinois (which had 27 electoral votes in 1960), Kennedy would have received 276 electoral votes instead of his final total of 303. In the 1960 election, there were only 537 total electoral votes, not 538 like today, so Kennedy needed 269 to win–and he had them without Illinois.
Emperor Norton on August 19, 2011 at 2:48 PM