Posts Tagged ‘party’

Ron Paul Indie Run Has Support of 1 in 5 Voters

Posted on: November 20th, 2011 by Kyle. | No Comments

Ron Paul is unlikely to win the Republican nomination, but should he run as an independent in next fall’s election he would be the strongest independent candidate since Ross Perot in 1992. An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll pegs the Texas Congressman’s support at 18 percent in a three-way race between himself, President Obama and Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee. While President Obama easily routs Mitt Romney in a two-way race (49-43), support for both of them falls with Paul in the race. Obama would only win 44 percent of the vote to Romney’s 32 percent.

Perhaps an even likelier scenario for Paul would be to run as the nominee of the Libertarian Party as he did in 1988. This would give him a guaranteed spot on the ballot in a number of states, including critical swing states such as Indiana. Instead of focusing on collecting signatures for an independent run, Paul could get an automatic position on the ballot and instead focus on campaigning. Given the reality of the electoral college, Paul could conceivably win enough electoral votes to deny either Obama or Romney a majority. That would send the race to the U.S. House of Representatives.

John Thune Passes Up Presidential Bid

Posted on: February 23rd, 2011 by Kyle. | No Comments

Senator John Thune of South Dakota declared on Tuesday that he would not be seeking the Republican nomination for president in 2012. The “rising star” in the Republican Party, as he is often called, would have had a decent shot at winning the party’s nomination. Personally, I had my bets on him. Unlike Palin, Romney, Gingrich and Huckabee, Thune does not have serious political baggage. Unlike Mitch Daniels and Tim Pawlenty, he could credibly call himself a true blood conservative. He’s only served in the Senate for the past six years, so he would have been able to run as an “outsider”. And as superficial as it seems, he’s young and has good looks. All of them a plus.

So why did he decide to forgo a bid in 2012? The groundwork had already been laid for a potential run, he was getting his name out there, and has a passionate base of conservative support. The likely answer is that he saw the writing on the wall: President Obama is likely to win re-election in 2012. With his poll numbers back above 50% in an economy with unemployment still above 9%, it is pretty easy to see that the president’s standing will only further strengthen as the economy continues to improve.

Of course, a lot of things could happen to change the president’s fortunes: unrest in the Middle East could lead to higher gas prices and a double dip recession, Republicans may force a shut down of government if their budget cuts are not signed into law, etc. Still, the betting odds would have to be on the side of the president. A divided Republican Party, a likely Tea Party rebellion in the primaries and a clear field towards the Democratic nomination for Obama mean that he can essentially do what Bush did in 2004, sitting on the sidelines raising money while the Democrats beat each other to a bloody pulp. John Kerry emerged from 2004 with the label of a flip-flopper from Howard Dean supporters and it stuck throughout the campaign. It’s easy to imagine a similar situation occurring in a contested Republican primary, especially with fire-throwing Tea Party candidates.

With Thune out, there are now no sitting senators actively seeking the White House in 2012, a highly unusual situation. In fact, it’s possible that not a single member of Congress runs for president in 2012, unless Michele Bachmann or Ron Paul decide to run. Most of the potential candidates are has-beens: Romney was a one-term governor over four years ago, Gingrich the Speaker of the House during the 1994 Republican Revolution, and Sarah Palin a half-term governor of a small state. The only potential candidate currently holding an actual office is Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels. Not exactly a strong field of candidates. It says a lot when no one on the Republican side seems willing to lose their current job in order to make a run for the most powerful office in the world.

Republican Party Sues Tea Party Candidates

Posted on: September 9th, 2010 by Kyle. | 1 Comment

The Republican Party has begun an offensive push against Tea Party candidates across the country. The Tea Party has defeated more mainstream Republican Senate candidates that were backed by the party. After the upset victories of Tea Party candidates in Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Kentucky and other states, Republicans have decided to resort to litigation and complaints with federal election regulators.

The first case comes out of Delaware, where moderate Congressman Mike Castle is fighting desperately to avoid a similar upset that Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski just suffered a few short weeks ago to a far-right Tea Party opponent. The Republican Party in Delaware filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission, accusing Senate candidate Christine O’Donnell of illegally collaborating with the Tea Party Express. As CQ Politics is reporting it:

The complaint alleges that the O’Donnell campaign is “knowingly accepting illegal campaign contributions from the Tea Party Express PAC.” It cites two “alarming” instances:

– O’Donnell has knowingly accepted excessive contributions from the Tea Party Express that were directly solicited on behalf of the O’Donnell campaign, according to the filing.

– O’Donnell has accepted illegal excessive contributions from the Tea Party Express by engaging in a statewide coordinated communications effort in support of her campaign. This means, according to the complaint, that every advertisement that is being run by the Tea Party Express in support of Ms. O’Donnell is a violation of Federal law.

The Chairman of the Delaware Republican Party said that she “needs to immediately call upon her third party supporters to cease and desist this illegal behavior.” With the primary coming on Tuesday, there is no chance that the FEC will make a ruling in time, which makes this complaint quite odd. If O’Donnell wins the nomination and the FEC finds wrongdoing, sanctions against her campaign would undercut her ability to win a general election campaign. Tea Party voters could easily see this as Republican Party leaders bullying their candidate (Sarah Palin endorsed O’Donnell on Friday). The fact that such an unusual complaint would be filed just a few days before the primary suggests that Republicans are extremely worried about Castle’s prospects on Tuesday.

The second complaint comes out of Colorado, where the Republican Party is attempting to prevent bomb-throwing former Congressman Tom Tancredo from appearing on November’s ballot for governor. Tancredo decided to run after the Republican nominee, Dan Maes, refused to drop out. The deadline for dropping out was today, leaving no chance for a new nominee. With all of this in-fighting going on, Republicans may be the worst enemy of Republicans right now.

Is 2010 an anti-incumbent year? Not quite.

Posted on: August 5th, 2010 by Kyle. | 1 Comment

For all of the talk in the media about how bad of an “anti-incumbent year” 2010 is turning out to be, only six members of Congress have so far been swept from power. Two of them – Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Alabama Congressman Parker Griffith – were party switchers that had never won a primary in the party that they switched to. Of the 282 elections so far this year with federal incumbents, only 2 percent have lost.

Larry Sabato told Slate.com that this is about average. “Usually there’s one Senate seat lost, we’re at two; about five House seats, we’re at four.” There are 535 members of Congress, although only 1/3 of the Senate is up for re-election, with the rest of the members retiring or not seeking re-election. The remaining primaries of 2010 offer few true opportunities for upsets. John McCain in Arizona is being challenged by J.D. Hayworth. Appointed Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado is also being challenged in what could prove to be an upset.

The six incumbent losses – again, only 2 percent of primaries with incumbents in them – can readily be explained. Party switchers rarely are welcomed by their new party. Rep. Mollohan faced ethics allegations and Congresswoman Kilpatrick was the mother of Detroit’s unpopular, legally-challenged mayor Kwame Kilpatrick. Finally, Senator Bob Bennett of Utah and Congressman Bob Inglis were victims of a rabid Tea Party movement that is seeking to purify the Republican Party.

The point is that the environment, while certainly not preferable for incumbents in a year where unemployment is near double digits, is not nearly as bad as the media is making it out to be. These cases show that scandal, disloyalty and “moderation” (although Bennett and Inglis both had conservative ratings of over 90%) are weaknesses, not incumbency. If anything, incumbency is a strength (politically speaking). This is no different than any other year as the average retention rate in the House is 93.3 percent and 81.6 percent in the Senate. If you are an incumbent, you should like your odds.

Party Switcher Parker Griffith Loses GOP Primary

Posted on: June 2nd, 2010 by Kyle. | No Comments

Just five months ago Parker Griffith called himself a Democrat. Today, he’s a soon-to-be former member of Congress. The party switcher lost in the Republican primary of his conservative Alabama district. Tuesday’s primary resulted in a victory for Mo Brooks, who received 51 percent of the vote to Griffith’s 33 percent, avoiding a runoff by 600 votes. This follows only two weeks after another party switcher, Arlen Specter, lost the Democratic nomination in Pennsylvania’s Senate race after being a Republican for more than 40 years.

“I know who our general election opponent is: (Speaker of the House) Nancy Pelosi,” Brooks said, sounding themes for the general election. “Our ultimate goal is not to win the primary. We have to do for America one thing, which is to get a new Speaker of the House. We must, as a people, put a stop to what’s going on in Washington before the nation goes over a cliff. We must stop those who believe socialism is the way to go.”

Republicans tried to use Nancy Pelosi as a boogey(wo)man in Pennsylvania’s special election to replace the late John Murtha. They failed miserably, losing the district by roughly 10 percent. As has been stated many times in the media, this is the only district in the country that voted for John Kerry in 2004 and switched to John McCain in 2008. In other words, there is not a whole lot of love for Barack Obama here. That said, Democrats still managed to hold onto the seat comfortably.

The main problem with going after a Speaker of the House is that most people don’t even know who you are talking about. Worse yet, attacking a 70-something year old grandmother does not come across well, either. It could very well just end up alienating female voters. Considering the Alabama seat is safely in Republican territory (R+12), it is likely that Brooks will be the future Congressman from this rural Alabama district. In other parts of the country that are either swing districts or slightly Republican leaning, it is highly doubtful that such a message will prevail.

British Election Ends in Hung Parliament

Posted on: May 7th, 2010 by Kyle. | No Comments

For the first time since 1974, the British people have elected a hung parliament in which no party has won a majority of seats. With 326 seats needed to form a majority government, the Conservative Party has failed to reach the mark that just weeks ago seemed inevitable. Overall, the Conservatives saw a 5 percent swing in their direction from the last national election in 2005.

The Conservative Party leader, David Cameron, is in talks with the ideologically dissimilar Liberal Democrats to form a government. Nick Clegg, the leader of the Liberal Democrats, is seeking electoral reform in the country that would base a party’s seats in parliament on their percentage of the vote – a system similar to most other European countries. Despite achieving 23 percent of the vote, the Liberal Democrats only managed 57 seats, a decline of 5 seats from 2005. It’s obvious why they would want reform.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown of the Labour Party has vowed to fight on, despite losing a resounding 91 seats in the 650 seat chamber. If Cameron does not bow to the demands of the Liberal Democrats, it is hard to see what bargaining chip he has, as the Lib Dems could just as easily turn to the Labour Party, which has said they would consider such electoral reform. In fact, Brown released a statement saying he supports it.

The best source to keep updated on the British elections is without a doubt the BBC. They have a number of cool tools where you can examine race-by-race, as well as a proportional map that shows a better representation of how the country voted.

GOP Divided in Indiana Primary as Tea Party Loses

Posted on: May 4th, 2010 by Kyle. | No Comments

Today was primary day in the state of Indiana where an open Senate seat sent Republicans into a frenzy. Three major candidates vied for the party’s nomination: former Senator Dan Coats, former Rep. John Hostettler and State Senator Marlin Stutzman. The seat is currently held by Senator Evan Bayh, retiring after serving two terms. His retirement announcement came too late for Democrats to file for the May 4 primary. The state Democratic Party is expected to nominate Southwest Indiana Congressman Brad Ellsworth.

Primary Results

Dan Coats – 39%
Marlin A. Stutzman – 29%
John N. Hostettler – 23%
Don Bates, Jr. – 5%
Richard Behney – 4%

99% of precincts reporting

The vote was a test of the Tea Party appeal in Indiana. Marlin Stutzman started the race as a no-name candidate, but surged with support from the likes of far-right Republicans like Jim DeMint and Mike Huckabee. The fact that someone like Marlin Stutzman managed nearly 30% of the vote, with no name recognition across the state, has to be startling to establishment Republicans looking to pick up Bayh’s seat.

The establishment candidate in this race – Dan Coats – only managed 40 percent support. Will Tea Partiers rally around a Senator-turned-lobbyist? Will they support a candidate who was deemed a “carpetbagger” by his primary opponents for moving to Indiana from Virginia only to run for this seat? Most of them likely will, but uniting the Republican Party in Indiana will certainly be much more difficult than it will for the Democrats, who did not have a bruising primary. That said, Coats currently leads in statewide polling. Brad Ellsworth, meanwhile, has yet to run a statewide ad. I fully expect this to be a close race come November.

Meanwhile, across the border in Ohio, Democrats nominated Lt. Governor Lee Fisher to take on former Bush budget director Rob Portman. He defeated Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner. Ohio is a mirror image of Indiana, where retiring Republican Senator George Voinovich is leaving an open seat for a possible Democratic pickup opportunity. The most recent polling shows Lee Fisher slightly ahead of Rob Portman, although this will likely be a close one to watch as well.

GOP Chairman Says Party Won’t Win Back House

Posted on: January 8th, 2010 by Kyle. | No Comments

If you watch television at all, particularly Fox Conservative Opinion Channel (otherwise known as Fox “News”), you have probably heard a lot of Republican pundits talk about how they are going to retake the House of Representatives in the fall election. While it certainly would not be out of the realm of possibility if current political circumstances continue, most respected analysts expect Democrats to lose roughly 15-25 seats. This would go along with historical patterns that see the president’s party lose seats in the second year of his first term (George W. Bush was the only modern exception directly after 9/11).

In order to win the House, however, Republicans would need to pick up 40 seats. That’s roughly double their current projected pickups. It is also more than Democrats managed to win in the 2006 elections or 2008 elections. In those years, with President Bush’s approval rating in the high 20s to low 30s, Democrats won 31 seats and 21 seats, respectively. President Obama’s approval rating stands around 50 percent, where it has been stabilizing for several months. Unless there is a significant drop in the president’s approval rating, it seems highly unlikely that Congress will switch hands.

The chairman of the Republican Party, Michael Steele, agrees with me. In an interview with that same Fox Conservative Opinion Channel, Michael Steele shut the door on the possibility. Sean Hannity asked him if Republicans would win back the House. His response: “Not this year.” He went on to cast doubt on whether Republicans should even return to power. “If we do that, are we ready? I don’t know. That’s what I’m assessing and evaluating now.”

GOP Becoming Party of Crazies

Posted on: December 11th, 2009 by Kyle. | No Comments

The Republican Party is moving far to the right, as was expected following the exit of independent voters in 2006 and 2008. The Tea Party wing of the party is clearly winning out. Two polls confirm the radical thinking of the few remaining members. The polling firm PPP asked respondents whether Barack Obama won last year’s election legitimately. According to the poll, “a 52% majority of GOP voters nationally think that ACORN stole the Presidential election for Barack Obama last year, with only 27% granting that he won it legitimately.”

President Barack Obama won the election by 10 million votes. Not only did he win traditional swing states like Florida, Pennsylvania and Ohio, he also carried states that traditionally leaned Republican such as Indiana, Virginia, North Carolina and Nevada. For an organization with very limited resources, Republicans seem to think that ACORN has the ability to steal elections even in states with Republican governors (such as Indiana, Florida and Nevada) running the show.

A poll taken in September found that “42 percent of Republicans believe that President Obama was not born in the United States, while 22 percent still remain uncertain of his birthplace origin.” Finally, a third poll showing just how crazy the Republican Party has become asks respondents whether the president should be impeached. While only 20 percent of Americans support such action, 35 percent of Republicans believe that President Obama should be impeached.

The only grounds for impeachment, according to the Constitution are for “high crimes and misdemeanors”, something that arguably could be used against say – President Bush for ordering the use of torture and misleading the nation into a war. What exactly President Obama has done that constitutes a high crime – other than enact policies that the country voted for – I’m not quite sure.

These types of beliefs don’t mesh well with mainstream America. Believing that our president is not only illegitimate, but a secret Muslim born in another country is considered loony – even in most conservative circles. The Tea Party movement is clear in what they want to do. “Our goal is to take over the Republican Party,” Matt Kibbe said on Hardball. If the Republican Party does not get their crazy elements under control, a year in which they could make inroads, 2010 may end up seeing more Democrats getting elected to Congress.

Republicans Have an Olympic Sized Bad Attitude

Posted on: October 2nd, 2009 by Kyle. | No Comments

This week saw a flurry of public condemnations make their way towards President Obama from Republican politicians for his trip to Copenhagen to promote the United States’ bid to host the Olympic Games. It seems that nothing can deter Republicans from opposing this president, including the prospect of having the premier sporting event for the first time in twenty years (by the time 2016 rolls around). The Olympics would have brought with it construction jobs, tourists and an opportunity for America to display a more positive image to the world. The Chinese, despite a horrible human rights record, managed to do this during the 2008 Beijing games.

For whatever reason, undoubtedly political, Republicans are proving to be a self-destructive force in their opposition to the president. In some countries, such as Great Britain, the opposition party is known as the “Loyal Opposition”. We have no such opposition party in this country. If President Obama is for getting the Olympics, Republicans are opposed to it. The reaction from Republican politicians is laughable and childish, but has proven to be true throughout President Obama’s short tenure.

“Listen I think it’s a great idea to promote Chicago but he’s the president of the United States, not the mayor of Chicago,” Minority Leader John Boehner said. “And the problems we have here at home affect all Americans and that’s where his attention ought to be.”

Where, Mr. Boehner, was your opposition when President Bush visited Beijing for a week last year as our economy was crashing? What purpose did his presence serve other than to spend more vacation time as president? President Obama actually tries to do something positive, winning the Olympic Games for his country, and all you have to say is that he should be at the White House 24/7 as Republicans in Congress oppose everything that he puts forward anyway. It is truly mind boggling how Mr. Boehner is in a leadership position.

Speaking of Republican “leaders”, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is among the Republicans rooting against America. Gingrich posted a duo of Tweets bashing President Obama for his efforts:

President Eisenhower had a rule that Presidents of the United States went to the meetings after success had been assured

Somehow charm and oratory dont (sic) seem to work in foreign affirs (sic) but historians have warned that foreign policy is different than campaigning

Using Gingrich’s logic, one should never compete in something unless they are guaranteed to win. There was no conceivable way that the White House could have known the outcome of the vote. They figured that the benefits of winning would outweigh the political risk of losing. Clearly the Republican leadership was more interested in sabotaging the President and country for political gain than they were bringing the Olympics home. I might remind people that Democrats did not act this way in 2005 when New York was rejected by the IOC.

Which brings me to my final thought. If Republicans want something to complain about, it should be the IOC. The IOC is not a representative body. There are two members from the United States out of nearly 100 total. They weren’t even allowed to vote since we had a city in contention. The Europeans, meanwhile, have roughly 50 members (depending on your definition of “European country”). That is a 50 to 2 disadvantage that we faced when you compare the number of European members vs. American. This unbalanced approach needs to be addressed before the United States even considers putting up a city again. North America has roughly the same population as Europe. This formula is equivalent to giving Texas 50 electoral votes and New York only 2 when the states are fairly close in population. Only the IOC could come up with a system that is worse than the Electoral College.