Quotable: Gallup finds GOP “double-digit lead” will “translate into Republicans gaining well above the number of seats necessary to control the House”

Gallup on the Disproportionate Enthusiasm:

“Our latest measure for the week of Sept. 20-26 shows Republicans with a 20-percentage-point lead over Democrats in terms of the percentage of voters who are “very” enthusiastic about voting. Additionally, preliminary modeling of the likely electorate using Gallup’s traditional likely voter questions (more on this next week) suggests that if current patterns persist, Republicans could have a double-digit lead in the national House vote on Election Day, which would translate into Republicans gaining well above the number of seats necessary to control the House.”

Obama brings change to the campaign trail:

“There is a scrambling feel to this campaign, that he is trying to pick up what he should have been doing a year-and-a-half ago, which is getting in front of this economic disaster,” Goldford said.

“The president on Tuesday headlined a Democratic National Committee rally in Madison, Wis. Sen. Russell Feingold, who was not expected to attend the rally changed his mind Tuesday afternoon and made a short speech at the rally. Feingold is trailing Republican challenger Ron Johnson by 12 percentage points.”

 Broder on the new and different Gallup numbers, and projections of what they mean for the Dems:

“The most recent number, a cumulative figure based on surveys during the first half of 2010, drew some attention because it was the highest percentage for conservatives in any such poll since Gallup started asking this question in 1992. The five-point gain came equally from the ranks of moderates and liberals, who fell to 35 percent and 20 percent, respectively.

“….What was less noticed at the time were the state-by-state Gallup figures, but thanks to the busy calculators at Third Way, the moderate Democratic advocacy and political action group, the implications of those numbers for the midterm election have become clear in a memo circulating around Washington.

“…They explain why so many Democratic candidates are struggling in states such as Wisconsin and Washington, which have been kind to their party in the recent past. And they argue that President Obama may have been focused on the wrong target when he kicked off his fall campaigning at the University of Wisconsin in the liberal stronghold of Madison.

“….With the updated Gallup figures, a 2010 Democratic candidate who matched Obama’s national percentages would win Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Oregon and Washington. But, with more conservatives and fewer liberals in the mix, the Democrat would come up short in 13 other competitive states and barely break even in California, Illinois and New Hampshire. Among the big states where the numbers break against the Democrats are Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

“…But the basic math shows why Democrats such as Sen. Russ Feingold in Wisconsin are struggling this year and why Obama may witness the defeat of his fellow Democrats running for governor and senator in his home state of Illinois.

“…And, in the view of the Third Way analysts, the math also suggests the limitations on the apparent White House strategy of concentrating the president’s campaign efforts on young people and single women. To the extent that those groups delivered liberal votes to Obama in 2008, it makes sense to mine them again.

“But if Gallup is right, and I believe its methodology is solid, there simply are fewer liberal votes to be won this time. And, as the Third Way memo says, “While the middle has always played a pivotal role in American electoral politics, where they swing this fall will certainly decide the fate of the Democratic majority.”

How about we have another health care debate, since the first one worked out so well, say after the Speaker loses her job:

“Young People and Minorities Are All the President Has Left” is the arresting headline on the National Journal’s new poll of Americans, conducted with the Pew Research Center.

“The survey found that the president still retains support among voters under 30 who helped elect him in 2008, but even there his excellent or good job rating is only 45%, as opposed to 47% who rate him fair or poor. His worst numbers are with voters aged 50 to 64, only 34% of whom rate him positively.

“Minority voters are still solidly behind the president, with 76% of blacks expressing approval. A majority of Hispanic voters also still approve. But among non-Hispanic whites, the bottom has dropped out. Only 30% score Mr. Obama positively, with 66% rating him fair or poor. Opinions among white voters vary with education but the news isn’t good for Mr. Obama. White women who are college graduates give him a 39% positive job rating, while he wins 31% of white men with a similar educational background. White voters without a college degree have become the biggest headache for the Obama White House: only 31% of women who fit that description rate the president well and only 22% of men.”

McDonalds and the ObamaCare promise of keeping your plan:

“McDonald’s Corp. has warned federal regulators that it could drop its health insurance plan for nearly 30,000 hourly restaurant workers unless regulators waive a new requirement of the U.S. health overhaul.

“The move is one of the clearest indications that new rules may disrupt workers’ health plans as the law ripples through the real world.”

McDonald’s is the tip of the iceberg.”

“And yes, the shifting from private to government insurance is the ultimate, intended consequence — and has been all along. (See here, here, here, here, here.)

“McDonald’s is the tip of the iceberg. Many other major companies that offer mini-med plans will also be affected, including Home Depot Inc., Disney Worldwide Services, CVS Caremark Corp., Staples Inc. and Blockbuster Inc. And the feds may not make a decision until it’s too late. The WSJ points out that many companies’ deadlines for signing up employees to benefit plans arrive in November.

“What fresh demonization, reeducation, or inquisition plan will the White House peddle now in response to this latest inconvenient truth about Obamacare’s toll?”

 Obama’s stubborn arrogance:

“Obama, by contrast, is the most hidebound ideologue to serve in the White House in my lifetime (witness his hell-bent determination to raise taxes on the most productive cohort of Americans in a recession despite advice to the contrary by leading economists, including one who used to work for him). Pragmatism means expanding his shrinking base beyond blacks, public union employees and academics; he can afford to offend the crazy left in order to broaden his appeal among moderates and independents.

“Fourth, he needs to change his personal image. To me, Obama comes across as a narcissistic, condescending, elitist, pedantic scold who thinks he knows what’s best for people who are too dumb to realize it.

“Fifth, Obama needs to cut back on television appearances; they only remind people of why they’ve lost faith in him. I’d make a sizeable wager, in fact, that if he cut his public speeches and photo ops in half, his approval ratings would turn positive within weeks.”

Is this where the weirdness is coming from?  Or is it The One himself?

“As the senior adviser in charge of “public engagement,” she has been the White House official responsible for maintaining relationships with the business community and with liberal interest groups — two of the most conspicuous areas of failure for the White House during Obama’s first two years.”

“…With the absence of Emanuel, Jarrett’s primary rival, and Axelrod, Obama’s other staff confidant, her ability to exert her influence in any matter of her choosing would go largely unchecked.”

 Senator Roberts (R-KS) pounds his friend and colleague — “she’s keeping a list:”

“[Roberts] said that even some of the provisions that “will be beneficial to some Americans” — like allowing children under age 26 to remain on their parent’s insurance — won’t be cost-free.

“Instead of admitting that their policies are causing health insurers to raise their rates,” Roberts said, “the Obama Administration has unleashed…Sebelius to intimidate and silence its critics…by intimidation.”

“He accused her of attacking the First Amendment by “threatening to shut down companies” who exercise “free speech.”

“She’s keeping a list,” the senator said. “Some have called this gangster government in the press. As a former newspaper man, I am shocked. I am really stunned by my former governor’s actions.”

Are you, dear reader, shocked that the Dems — who have done everything in their power to limit free speech by restrictions on what can be said in political ads, including a 60-day moratorium on running television or radio ads prior to an election, in addition to their attempts to force donors to disclose their names, subjecting them to these kinds of pressure from the left — that these same folks who limit free speech because they don’t like what is being said, won’t use their new ObamaCare god like powers over all forms of health insurance in the U.S. to get companies to sing the tunes they are told to sing — or else? 

Here’s a NEWSFLASH, the Dems love their new powers, and they will use it to get what they want.  Depending on the Dems to use their powers to allow freedom of speech, when the Dems are on the receiving end of that speech, is, well, naive.  (Skipping through the tulips naive.)

The only way to fix this is to take the power away from the government and allow the idea that is at the center of America, freedom, to prevail unmolested.

Another reason Americans can’t stand Congress:

“A deeply unpopular Congress is bolting for the campaign trail without finishing its most basic job – approving a budget for the government year that begins on Friday.” 

You may also like...

Leave a Reply