Archive for the ‘Special Elections’ Category

The Democrat Parties’ (plural possessive) problem heading into November is visible to people willing to see what’s actually there. What’s actually there are 2 political parties within the Democratic Party. There’s the far left wing of the Democrat Party, represented by Nancy Pelosi. Then there’s the even farther left wing of the Democrat Party. That wing is represented by Ilhan Omar, AOC and, to a lesser degree, Lisa Bender and Jeremiah Ellison.

The Pelosi wing of the Democrat Party are nuttier than a warehouse full of fruitcake. They just pretend that they’re moderates. They aren’t moderates except by comparison with the AOC wing. Two years ago, Democrats crowed about how Conor Lamb was their blueprint for a candidate. This year, Lamb will likely lose to Sean Parnell in western Pennsylvania.

Lamb’s problem is what I’ve called Tarryl Clark syndrome. For those of you outside Minnesota, Tarryl used to be my state senator until 2010. Then she was known as a moderate when she first ran. Then a terrible thing happened to Tarryl. She accumulated a voting record. Included in that record was a vote to literally vote for a tax increase. When she cast her vote, the vote was tied 33-33. Thereafter, she became Taxin’ Tarryl Clark. In 2010, Michele Bachmann beat Tarryl by 14 points, as I predicted. But I digress. Lamb has accumulated a rather leftist voting record, too. He voted for both articles of impeachment. He’s voted with Pelosi 90+ percent of the time.

The AOC wing of the Party wants to defund police departments. They also want to defund ICE, aka the Immigration and Customs Enforcement. This wing of the Democrat Party is vehemently opposed to law enforcement. This is what happens when you don’t worship at the altar of the AOC wing of the Democrat Party:

Brad Parscale, the Trump campaign’s manager, wrote this scathing op-ed that demolished the credibility of most media polls. In it, he wrote this:

To the delight of liberals everywhere, the Atlanta-based hub of fake news recently put out a poll showing Biden with a 14-point lead in the race, with 55% of the vote to Trump’s 41%, a larger share than any presidential candidate has received in an actual election since Ronald Reagan garnered 58.8% in his 1984 shellacking of Walter Mondale.

CNN’s latest wonder is a poll of all adult voters, with no effort made to sort out which people are likely, or even registered, to vote. This method of polling consistently undercounts Republican turnout, as more-reputable polling outfits have long understood, and as CNN should have learned from 2016.

Think of this as a repeat of the battle between the COVID models vs. the COVID data. The same principles apply. The models made a projection based on incomplete data. They were wrong.

Meanwhile, elections have been held over the past month. In the special elections to fill empty seats in Wisconsin and California. Republicans handily won both seats. A week later, city council races were held in Staunton, VA. All 4 Democrat incumbents got defeated. Last week, a presidential primary was held in Pennsylvania, the biggest of the battleground states. Though both candidates had clinched their party’s nomination, turnout was high. President Trump got 861,000 votes. Biden got 734,000 votes. That’s a hard margin of 54%-46% in President Trump’s favor. That isn’t speculation. That’s the results of a real election.

Once the campaign starts, segment like this will hurt Biden to the core:

There’s even a strong indication of pro-Biden skew in the numbers themselves. Only 37% of registered voters who told CNN they were more likely to vote for Biden said they were actually voting for Biden, as opposed to against Trump. That’s a dire figure. For comparison, polls consistently showed that about three-quarters of Barack Obama’s voters were “for” him rather than “against” his opponent.

People are simply not enthusiastic about Biden. Shoot, even Biden doesn’t seem very enthusiastic about Biden most of the time. They are, however, extremely enthusiastic about Trump — even in the supposedly “devastating” CNN poll, about 70% of those who say they will vote for Trump say they’re voting for him, not against Biden.

That’s what’s called an enthusiasm gap. Sleepy Joe’s voters will turn out on election day. The difference is that President Trump’s voters will show up for phone banking, door-knocking and whatever else they’re asked to do. That’s a massive GOTV advantage in President Trump’s favor.

That’s why listening to people who say that this will be a tight race are wrong. Ditto with people who say that ‘anyone who tells you that they know how this election will turn out isn’t telling you the truth’. If you only look at the horserace figure without digging into the methodology, things look difficult for President Trump. Once you start putting the entire campaign together, including the data analytics, the GOTV machine and the fundraising, it isn’t difficult to figure out that President Trump is heading for re-election.

That’s before talking about the greatest GOTV operation in the history of campaigning, aka the #MAGA Rallies. They’re likely returning within the next 2-3 weeks. While Trump rallies attract 35,000-50,000 people both inside the arena and in the overflow, Joe will do remote interviews that attract voters by the dozens. The thought that this election will be close is laughable.

If anyone wondered whether Democrats would sink into the mud this presidential election, that question has been answered. Consider this article to be the first proof that Democrats plan on running a scorched earth campaign.

It starts by saying “Tim O’Brien, a former campaign aide for Mike Bloomberg and a Bloomberg opinion writer, is coming under fire for posting side-by-side photos of Joe Biden at a war memorial on Memorial Day and a photo of President Trump golfing on a different day with the caption, ‘Different approaches to Memorial Day.'” What a total cheapshot by Mr. O’Brien. That’s how you start a scorched earth campaign.

Democrats are starting things off with a flourish of diatribes. If Democrats, starting with O’Brien, think that this will fire up Biden’s base, they’d better consider the likelihood that O’Brien’s lie will fire up President Trump’s supporters more. President Trump’s supporters have shown that they’re fired up.

The special elections 2 weeks ago in Wisconsin and California were the first signal that Trump’s Troops were fired up. The city council meetings in Virginia were the next signal that Trump’s Troops are fired up. The Democrats’ scorched earth campaign won’t help with independent voters. Then again, keeping states locked down won’t help Democrats either.

President Trump didn’t disrespect our fallen heroes. Democrats did that by suggesting that President Trump didn’t attend the traditional Memorial Day ceremonies. In fact, President Trump’s time in office is littered with how he’s honored the military. He’s helped get vets the medical care they’ve earned. He’s rebuilt the military, too. He’s negotiated with our enemies to prevent wars.

Democrats seem intent on throwing mud at President Trump because they can’t compete with President Trump’s accomplishments. Now they’re afraid that President Trump’s policies will restart the great Trump economy of the first 3 years. This isn’t surprising. That’s what desperate people do.

Tuesday night, Mike Garcia was predicted to lose the special election in California’s 25th District. Mollie Hemingway’s article tells a different story. Mike Garcia didn’t just win the special election. He won by a lopsided margin.

This isn’t good news for Democrats. First, let’s stipulate that special elections often have weird turnouts. With that stipulated, though, let’s get to the important part. Kevin McCarthy is smiling because, as he told Sean Hannity tonight, there are 42 seats that are rated better than the seat Garcia just re-flipped. Republicans only need to flip 17 more seats in 2020 to retake the majority.

Earlier this week, I wrote that the massive Trump army didn’t disappear during the pandemic. Let’s be clear about something. Leader McCarthy spoke about the robust ballot-harvesting operation that happened in this special election — on the GOP side. If that muscle shows up in November, which I predict is likely, then it’s virtually certain that Queen Pelosi will have to relinquish her Speaker’s Gavel for a second time. This time, it will have been after just a single term as Speaker.

There’s another thing we should be clear about. If we don’t make retaking the House a high priority, then tyrants will have chairmen’s gavels. Think about how devastating it’d be with Nadler, Schiff, AOC and Maxine Waters with gavels. But I digress. Here’s what Ms. Hemingway wrote:

The case made by Geoffrey Skelley and Nathaniel Rakich was simple: Supposedly Americans strongly prefer Biden and Democrats over Trump and Republicans, and they are particularly upset with Trump and other Republicans’ attempts to reopen the country as the global Coronavirus pandemic rages.

“On Tuesday, we’ll get a taste of whether Democrats’ electoral advantage on paper will hold up in practice, as California and Wisconsin hold special elections for two vacant congressional seats. The main event is in the California 25th Congressional District, a bellwether seat in the north Los Angeles suburbs, where both parties see a chance to add to their ranks in the House. But if Democrats are also competitive in the quickly reddening, rural Wisconsin 7th Congressional District, it could signal another blue wave in the fall,” they argued.

That “blue wave” crashed in Wisconsin:

Trump won Wisconsin by less than a point, but carried the district by 20 points, in 2016. Tiffany’s win over Zunker was about 6 points less than that, based on preliminary results. Tiffany rejected Democrats’ argument that the smaller margin was a sign that Trump’s support was waning. “Any time you lose by 14 points, I don’t think that’s a moral victory,” Tiffany said. “This is a decisive victory here.”

I’d totally agree with both points. I think Democrats are misreading things. While President Trump is working with any governor that asks for the federal government’s help, Queen Pelosi keeps delaying bills that’ve put small businesses out of businesses. Democrats apparently haven’t noticed that people don’t like the draconian measures put in place by tyrants like Illinois’s J.B. Pritzker, Michigan’s Gretchen Whitmer and Pennsylvania’s Tom Wolf. If that trio of Democrat governors were up for re-election this fall, I’d bet heavily that, at minimum, 2 of the 3 would lose.

This is funny:

To steal a line from the original A-Team, “God, I love it when a plan comes together.”

Karl Rove’s article on a special election for a House seat in the Texas State Legislature is a positive bit of news for Republicans. The article starts by saying “While many Americans were focused on Washington this week, I was paying special attention to Fort Bend County, Texas. What took place in that Houston suburb may reveal more about the 2020 election than the impeachment trial in the Senate does.”

It continues by saying “Fort Bend held a special runoff election to fill a vacant state House seat left open by the resignation of the Republican incumbent, who took a job with the University of Texas. Sensing an opening, state and national Democrats decided a win in House District 28 would give them a head start on flipping the nine seats they’d need to control the Texas House and boost their efforts to overturn GOP state legislative majorities from Arizona to Florida, Wisconsin to Pennsylvania and a dozen states in between.”

Next, let’s skip to the part about how badly Democrats wanted to flip this seat:

Democrats, eager to set the tone for 2020, piled into the race with money, endorsements, technology, lists and volunteers to help Elizabeth Markowitz defeat her Republican opponent. Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren and Mike Bloomberg all endorsed Ms. Markowitz. Mr. Bloomberg even carved out time from his presidential campaign to go door-to-door with her. Former presidential candidates Julián Castro and Robert Francis O’Rourke also canvassed neighborhoods, Mr. O’Rourke so frequently that it looked as if he was trying to establish residency.

How effective were the Democrats’ efforts? This effective:

All these hopes of a Democratic victory were shattered Tuesday. In the biggest turnout in history for a Texas House special runoff, Republican Gary Gates walloped Ms. Markowitz 58% to 42%. His 16-point margin of victory was more than twice the Republican incumbent’s in 2018 and larger than the district margins for President Trump in 2016 (10 points) and Sen. Ted Cruz in 2018 (three).

If that’s the best they can do after sinking that many resources into a special election, Democrats should be worried. Of course, Democrats will spin this by saying ‘That’s a GOP district. We thought it was a longshot from the start.’

David Catron’s article for The American Spectator focuses on how the racial divide in North Carolina’s Ninth District is closing. Catron writes “Last week the Democrats were touting the special election in North Carolina’s 9th District as the first major contest of the 2020 cycle, and the polls indicated that Democrat Dan McCready might win what should be a pretty safe GOP seat. By Wednesday morning, after Republican Dan Bishop had won, their focus had shifted and much commentary was devoted to his ‘thin margin of victory.’ Little notice was taken of certain voting patterns that should frighten the Democrats. Specifically, McCready did far worse than expected in every county but one, and many of those counties are dominated by minority voters.”

In this paragraph, though, Catron notices that “The most unnerving example, from the Democratic perspective, is rural Robeson County. The ethnic makeup of this county is as follows: Native American (38.6%), White (25.7%), Black (24%), Hispanic (8.52%), Two or More Races (2.15%), Asian (0.66%), Other (0.275%). On Tuesday the Democrat received a fraction of the votes he received in 2018, running for the same seat. Ryan Matsumoto of Inside Elections provides the gory details: ‘McCready won Robeson County by only 1.11 points, a MASSIVE decrease from his 15.31 point margin last November.‘ In 2012, Obama carried Robeson by 17 points.”

That isn’t the type of performance that Democrats should be happy with. Still, Republicans shouldn’t be too overjoyed. The margin was still too narrow for my liking. This might explain why Bishop did so well with minorities:

One result: the persistent gap between white and black unemployment also narrowed to its smallest on record. The unemployment ratio has averaged around 2 to 1 or so for decades, meaning the black unemployment rate is typically twice the white unemployment rate. In good times, the unemployment rate of whites and blacks falls but the gap remains…. [B]lack unemployment typically remains around twice that of white employment…. In other words, the decline in employment inequality now is undeniably the best on record because it comes in the context of falling unemployment.

If that performance can be replicated in other battleground states and swing districts, that would make quite a difference. The fact that President Trump’s policies are helping narrow the unemployment gap between minorities and whites is a great selling point for President Trump’s campaign. It shows that he’s actually accomplishing things that are making life better for minorities.

By contrast, Democrats have overpromised and underdelivered for decades. In answer to President Trump’s question to minorities of “What do you have to lose?”, it’s pretty obvious that minorities have another generation to lose. Finally, there’s this:

The voters who elected Dan Bishop to the House of Representatives are the people who actually work for a living in places like Cumberland, Richmond, and Robeson counties. They are by no means all white, and they remember all too well what it was like during the Obama years and how it felt to go hat in hand to the unemployment office. That should frighten the Democrats badly.

Let’s see who wins that district in 2020.

Harold Hamilton’s weekly commentary contained a great pop quiz on a DFL family dynasty:

Candidate #1: Union electrician. Started his own electrical contracting company, which is also union. Never went to college; educated in the electrician’s apprenticeship training program. Likes to snowmobile, ice fish, and hunt deer. Lives in a rural area of the district and drives a pick-up.

Candidate #2: Lists a work history in politics. No private sector experience. Graduate of Carleton College. Has been living in Washington, DC (AKA The Swamp) for the past year. Comes from a political dynasty that has been in political office for decades.

If you guessed that the Democrat was candidate #1, you would be WRONG. Candidate #1 is Jason Rarick, who is the Republican candidate for Senate District 11.

This district will elect a new state Senator on February 5th to replace the incumbent, who was appointed to a political patronage job by Governor Tim Walz. Jason Rarick doesn’t come from a background of any prominence or privilege. His daddy was no one of any note.

He didn’t go to an elite private college, where the tuition is $55,000 per year, which is more than the median annual household income in Senate District 11 by a long shot. Instead, Rarick graduated high school and enrolled in the electrician’s apprenticeship program, where he learned to become a skilled tradesman and work with his hands. After mastering the craft of the electrician, he took the risk of starting his own company, Rarick Electric.

He started out like every entrepreneur, with one truck, one employee, and big dreams. He knows what it means to worry about feeding a family. He knows what it’s like to worry about work and where the next job will come from. He knows what it’s like to work with your hands. He knows how to assemble, disassemble, and perform a functions check on a deer rifle. He knows how to change the oil in truck and a snowmobile.

The Democrat, Stu Lourey, couldn’t be more different. After graduating from Carleton College, he immediately went to work in politics, working for both Senator Al “happy hands” Franken and Senator Tina Smith. Beyond that, Lourey has no work history. His only real credentials for serving the people the Senate District 11 is that he has the correct last name.

You see, Stu’s dad has been the state Senator for some years. And before that, Stu’s grand mama was the senator. In short, he comes from a political dynasty. And dynasties always believe that DNA is really the only qualification to propagate dynasties. Put another way, if Stu’s last name was “Jones” or “Lundquist” or “O’Leary”, he wouldn’t have had a shot at this office.

How ironic that the party of the “working man” is backing a privileged kid who has a powerful daddy for office over a true working man who boasts of nothing more than a belief that an honest day’s work will get you an honest day’s pay.

In other words, Stu Lourey is just another career politician. Then there’s this:

To get a great visual presentation of what we’re describing, head on over to Stu’s web site. Take a look at the photos. You see him all dressed up in Carhart work gear and Gamehide hunting gear.

There’s just one minor problem. None of the gear has a single rip or stain. No coffee stains. No blood stains. No mud. No dust. It looks like Stu borrowed the gear from John Kerry.

In other words, Lourey is a total phony. He’s as much a part of the working class as Kerry. It’s time to retire this family dynasty.

Finally, Tony Lourey was one of the authors of the disaster we call MNsure.

In their Our View Editorial endorsing Karin Housley, the Duluth News Tribune included a quote from Tina Smith, Karin’s DFL opponent.

In the quote, Smith said “Minnesotans are sick and tired of the partisan bickering. They don’t have Republican problems or Democrat problems, and so my whole approach has been to listen really hard, to work really hard to do my best to solve problems for people. That’s what I’ve been doing, and that’s what I want to continue to do.”

She couldn’t have listened that hard on then-Judge Kavanaugh. Within minutes of President Trump nominating Brett Kavanaugh, Tina Smith had announced that she wouldn’t meet with him and that she wouldn’t vote to confirm him. That doesn’t sound like listening to me. This is what listening looks like:

This is the video of Tina Smith ignoring Minnesotans by not attending a debate with Karin Housley that was televised statewide:

Karin Housley respected Minnesotans by showing up and answering questions. She has legitimate legislative accomplishments. Tina Smith is just another politician hoping you won’t notice that she’s ignoring you.

Minnesotans are smarter than that. I’m betting you’ll notice and make Tina Smith pay for her elitism.

As usual, Salena Zito’s latest column provides the best insight into another election that’s caught the public’s attention. This time, Ms. Zito is writing about Tuesday’s special election in Ohio’s 12th district. The special election pits Democrat Danny O’Connor against Republican Troy Balderson.

In her article, Ms. Zito wrote that Vice President Mike Pence hosted a rally for Troy Balderson on July 30 before writing that “Pence left no doubt in the packed event hall in the center of picturesque Newark. He repeated the Aug. 7 date no less than a dozen times. He even made the attendees repeat it back to him.”

The question now remaining unanswered is whether Trump’s voters will turn out in sufficient numbers to propel Balderson to victory. This provides some insight into that question:

Outside the Pence event, Democratic activists, with signs covering every issue imaginable, chant slogans and attempt to engage with GOP supporters. One gentleman with a bull-horn chants, “Balderson hates puppies,” at the folks trying to enter.

“The Trump hysteria kind of gets old,” Wade Rogers says. “Especially when you walk up here to come in line, the first time you’ve ever been this political — where we’ve come to a rally of any sort — and when you hear the opposition over there screaming, ‘Troy Balderson hates puppies.’ I mean, to me, that’s people that’s out of sync with normalcy.”

This provides more insight into the outcome of Tuesday’s race:

Wade Rogers, who had never been very political, says he knows what is at stake, not just for this special election, but also to show up in November. He addresses the question on many reporters’ minds: Is he satisfied enough with the results of the Trump presidency to take the time to vote for a member of Congress, not once, but twice this year?

Absolutely,” he says with a broad grin. “We need to keep showing up. It’s important that the president has a Republican Congress to help pass his agenda for the next two years. You don’t take these things for granted,” he said.

Statements like that tell me that the Trump Brigade won’t let Troy Balderson down. Let’s hear from Mr. Balderson himself:

These rallies don’t guarantee a Balderson victory Tuesday night. That being said, the fact that Trump’s supporters understand the importance of this special election is a positive sign for Balderson and the White House. According to Jai Chabria, this is an affluent district:

This is the type of district that isn’t filled with tons of Trump voters. If Balderson wins this race by 5+ points Tuesday nights, that will be quite the positive sign for Republicans.

When he’s campaigning, Conor Lamb attempts to sound like a Lindsey Graham Republican. One trip to his campaign website priorities page, though, exposes him as a hardline progressive.

On the subject of health care, Lamb says “I believe that every American has a right to go see a doctor when they’re sick, and that means every American has a right to health insurance they can afford. The Affordable Care Act has flaws, but it has provided affordable coverage to more than a million Pennsylvanians who were previously uninsured. Our representatives in Congress should be working together to build on that progress, fix what isn’t working, and make the law better. Instead, Republicans in Congress spent the past year trying to take health insurance away from people with no plan to replace it. Now, costs are likely to go up for many of us, especially those with preexisting conditions. That is unacceptable, and it’s a failure of leadership.”

The ACA isn’t “flawed.” It’s a disaster that, until tax reform was passed, forced people to buy a product or pay a hefty fine if they didn’t buy health insurance. Further, Republicans didn’t spend “the past year trying to take health insurance away from people.” They gave people the option to not buy insurance if they didn’t like their options. Hopefully, sometime soon, we’ll get rid of QHPs, aka Qualified Health Plans, which is how Democrats forced people to buy insurance policies they didn’t like.

On energy, Lamb is wishy-washy at best:

In short, Lamb isn’t as hardline progressive as Bernie Sanders but he isn’t who he’s pretending to be, either.

While my constitutional position on Lt. Gov. Fischbach hasn’t changed, Don Davis’ article reminded me why I despise Sen. Bakk’s political tactics. It’s why Gov. Dayton didn’t trust Bakk. According to Davis’ article, Bakk said “he wants to time a lawsuit so the court can remove Fischbach as senator when Democrats can best elect a replacement for her in the central Minnesota district. If that happened, Democrats would take control. Fischbach said she is confident she can win her district again, if a court orders he removed from the Senate. But Bakk said Democrats have a candidate waiting who is ‘a good fit for the district.'”

That good fit must be Larry Hosch. He’s the only candidate who’d have a prayer in that district. If Hosch isn’t the candidate, then Sen. Bakk is just blowing smoke. The DFL’s bench in that district is virtually nonexistent. From what I’ve been told, Hosch’s wife is from Paynesville, which would be important to winning a special election.

That being said, Hosch announce his retirement from the House the minute that Rockville was added to his House district in 2012. Rockville consistently gives the GOP House candidate 80% of their votes. The minute the redistricting map was announced, Hosch essentially admitted that he’d get his butt kicked if he ran for re-election. What part of that sounds like Rep. Hosch is “a good fit for the district”? What part of this looks competitive?

FYI- HD-13A used to be Hosch’s district. He would’ve been lucky to lose by only 15 points if he’d chosen to run. Sen. Bakk can yap all he wants about good fits for the district but the numbers tell a different story. Whoever the DFL would run would get annihilated.

The point is that Sen. Bakk is either incredibly stupid or he’s playing a game. I don’t think he’s that stupid but I might be wrong.