Currently viewing the tag: "Incumbent"

Its never a good sign when an incumbent politician polls under 50% … such is the case with Barack Obama in Ohio and whether the voters think he deserves a second term.

According to a recent Quinnipiac Poll, 45% of Ohio voters think he deserves a second term, while 46% disapprove. Ohio, is a key swing state that Obama carried in 2008; however, went strongly Republican in the 2010 midterm elections. As stated by the Hot Air Pundit, Ohio is a must win for Republicans. However, the same could be said for Obama.

Ohio voters are split 45 - 46 percent on whether President Barack Obama deserves a second term, but they favor him over an unnamed Republican 2012 challenger 41 - 34 percent, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today. 
President Obama has a split 47 - 48 percent job approval rating, compared to 49 - 46 percent in a January 20 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University.

The problem for Obama in any swing state that he won in 2010 is that he now has a record to defend. Obama can not longer talk and “Hope & Change” or that he is not GWB. He will have to defend Obamacare, the economy and his continues lack of leadership when crisis occur. After being against Bush going to war, Obama has his own war now to defend in Libya.

Polls at this point are pretty much irrelevent; however, the real issues will be what is the economy, jobs, gas prices and the instability in the Middle East going to look like. Voters will have a clear choice in 2012 to decide on in Ohio and across the United States, the failed liberal/socialist policies of a weak president or a return to more conservative, capitalist ways.

One thing is for certain, Obamamania will not exists … We the People know exactly who and what Obama is. The real question is not whether Obama deservess a second term, it’s whether the United States can stand an

Share This

Scared Monkeys

Tagged with:


Recent quick hits

Tagged with:

U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Weston, has been tapped to lead House Democrats effort to retain their incumbents in the 2012 elections and as the point person on redistricting.

The appointment, reported by the online politics news site Politico, comes from U.S. Rep. Steve Israel, D-N.Y., chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. She’s one of five people named by Israel to DCCC national chairmanship positions.

Wasserman Schultz and one of the other five congressmen appointed by Israel were themselves considered by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi for Israel’s job as chairman of the DCCC, Politico said. It’s the campaign arm of the House Democrats, charged with helping raise money, develop strategy and recruit candidates.

Earlier in the week, Pelosi named Wasserman Schultz as one of two members of Congress who will have expanded roles in communicating House Democrats’ priorities with other members and the public.

Read the full Politico article.

Broward Politics

Tagged with:

Back in June, I wrote about the 2010 elections and made this observation:

If history is any guide, then it seems very likely that we’ll see something in the range of 90-94% of the incumbents in the House of Representatives who are up for election win their races. As 1994 demonstrates, of course, this still means that there could be a change in party control, but a change in party control is not the same thing as a change in personnel. In the Senate, on the other hand, a change of, say, six seats would drop of the incumbent re-election rate to 81%, but would not give the Republicans control of the Senate. To do that, they’d need to pick up 11 10 seats, which seems incredibly unlikely.

Given all the natural advantages they have, I think it’s fairly clear that most incumbents in Congress will survive this wave of anti-incumbency just like they’ve survived all the others.

It turns out that I was off, but not by much.

In the House of Representatives, 87% of the incumbents who stood for election were re-elected. This is slightly below the historical trend over the last several decades, and lower than the re-election rate in 1994, 2006, and 2008:

In the Senate, and assuming Lisa Murkowski’s write-in bid is successful, 84% of the incumbents who stood for re-election were successful (the number drops to 80%). Again, this is fairly consistent with the historical rate over the past forty years or so:

So, despite the changes that many are calling “historic,” the fact of the matter is that incumbents were, for the most part, as safe in 2010 as they have been in previous elections.

Outside the Beltway

Tagged with:

Phase one for restoring the republic is over: the House is now in Republican hands, thereby assuring nothing radical will sail through the Congress in the next two years (although it would be wise to be on the alert for unconstitutional executive orders intended to accomplish that purpose). If the electorate remains informed and stays on task, 2012 will see the Senate flip as well since the majority of seats up for reelection are currently in Democrat hands.

Obama Arrogant Look 2

Phase two may be more difficult. How likely is it that an incumbent president will be stripped of his position? What will it take? Some say it’s a very difficult task, yet it has occurred rather often. Under what circumstances? A short survey of twentieth-century presidential politics may offer some clues as to the feasibility that Barack Obama will be a one-termer.

We can begin with William Howard Taft, Republican winner of the 1908 election as the handpicked successor to Theodore Roosevelt.

William Howard Taft 1

For reasons too detailed to enter into in this abbreviated survey, Roosevelt soured on Taft and sought to reclaim the Republican nomination in 1912. He beat Taft in all the primaries, but the bulk of the delegates were still chosen at the convention, which the establishment controlled. Taft won the nomination, Roosevelt and his followers stormed out, and they formed a third party—the Progressives—that promptly split the Republican vote, allowing Woodrow Wilson to waltz into the White House with a minority of the popular vote. So, in this case, the incumbent met defeat due to such a strong challenge within his own party that it could not stay unified.

The next time an incumbent president failed to win reelection was in 1932 when Republican Herbert Hoover lost to Franklin Roosevelt. The circumstances for this loss were different.

Herbert Hoover 2

Hoover, in the eyes of most of the electorate, epitomized the current state of the economy: the Great Depression. With unemployment near 25%, his loss was no big surprise. Hoover certainly did his share to depress recovery; he was an interventionist president who tried to use the government to dig out of it. Nothing he tried worked, so the people chose FDR, who was merely Hoover on steroids. The Depression continued throughout the decade.

We have to jump to the 1960s for the next example, and it is slightly different than the previous two because the sitting president, Democrat Lyndon Johnson, bowed out of the 1968 race shortly after it began.


Beset by the unpopular Vietnam War, the nation split both politically and culturally because of it, LBJ decided after winning the New Hampshire primary less than spectacularly to a virtually unknown senator, Eugene McCarthy, that he didn’t have the stomach to continue. His vice president, Hubert Humphrey, shouldered the mantle of LBJ’s administration and policies, losing to Richard Nixon. Although Humphrey wasn’t the incumbent president, he was the next best thing.

The case of Republican Gerald Ford was unique: although he was a president seeking to remain in office, he had never been placed in that office by the voters.

Gerald Ford

Ford owed his incumbency to Watergate. Nominated by Nixon, and confirmed by the Senate, to replace the disgraced vice president Spiro Agnew, who resigned under the cloud of tax evasion charges, Ford only ascended to the presidential office upon Nixon’s resignation. While technically the incumbent, Ford had no real constituency and was ripe for being removed by the electorate. Amazingly, though, he gave Jimmy Carter a real run in 1976 and only suffered defeat by a narrow margin in the electoral college.

Carter’s success was short-lived.

Jimmy Carter

Again, a bad economy initiated the discomfort of the voters. Economists had to invent a new word—stagflation—to adequately describe what Carter achieved. Added to that was the insult of Iran’s revolution where the U.S. embassy in Tehran was seized and the Americans inside held hostage. Carter seemed impotent to do anything about it. Consequently, the combination of economic and foreign policy disasters brought him down and the nation enjoyed a return to prosperity and international respect under Ronald Reagan during the 1980s.

George H. W. Bush was the next victim, and he did his best to engineer his own defeat.

George Bush 2

Bush was wildly popular after the Gulf War, with public opinion polls peaking at 91% approval in March 1991. By the time of the election in November 1992, he was struggling with a slighly weak economy, a broken promise about no new taxes, and the third-party candidacy of Ross Perot. In that election, Perot took 19% of the popular vote. Although he didn’t win any states, most analysts believe the bulk of that 19% ordinarily would have been Republican votes. As a result of the third party, we had to endure Bill Clinton.

What can we learn from this survey? An incumbent president can be unseated for a variety of reasons: a bad economy, a split within his own party, a third-party candidacy that siphons off his base, or even a cultural shift. If Obama’s policies continue unabated, we will have a bad economy in 2012; it is conceivable, although not likely, he will be challenged from within his party [anyone anticipating another Clinton?]; a third-party candidacy strong enough to take votes from the Democrats is not a high probability but can’t be discounted; a cultural shift of sorts is underway as a multitude of Americans are now reconsidering the wisdom of the Founders.

Will President Obama be a one-term president? There is hope.

Big Government

Tagged with:

Our guest blogger is Tony Carrk, policy director of Progressive Media at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

For months, Think Progress has been chronicling the “U.S.” Chamber of Commerce’s $ 75 million campaign to put its interests over working- and middle-class families. It uses its substantial war chest to protect companies that outsource, oppose health reform, oppose Wall Street reform, and oppose clean energy. The Chamber will not disclose who is financing this campaign, fearing a public backlash. But we know the results: The 112th Congress will have more members to protect its pro-outsourcing, anti-middle class agenda.

So far, the Chamber’s spending contributed to the defeat of 20 incumbent Democrats. In all, the Chamber spent $ 31.8 million on ads or independent expenditures in 62 races. Six of those races are too close to call as of this afternoon. Of the remaining 57, the Chamber’s candidate won 36 of them — or 63 percent. The cost of those 36 wins: nearly $ 17 million.

Here is a list of races the Chamber won:

Race Total Chamber Position Chamber Win/Lose?
New York’s 24th district $ 25,712 Oppose Arcuri (D)* Win
Ohio’s 18th district $ 45,415 Oppose Space (D)* Win
Georgia’s 12th district $ 78,558 Support Barrow (D) Win
Wisconsin’s 8th district $ 89,418 Oppose Kagen (D)* Win
Florida’s 25th district $ 99,310 Oppose Garcia (D) Win
Illinois’s 14th district $ 99,952 Oppose Foster (D)* Win
Oklahoma’s 2nd district $ 135,799 Supporting Boren (D) Win
Pennsylvania’s 7th district $ 146,680 Oppose Lentz (D) Win
New Hampshire’s 1st district $ 148,640 Oppose Shea-Porter (D)* Win
New Hampshire’s 2nd district $ 149,380 Oppose Kuster (D) Win
Washington’s 3rd district $ 149,540 Oppose Dennis Heck (D) Win
Pennsylvania’s 8th district $ 170,000 Oppose P. Murphy (D)* Win
Kansas’s 3rd district $ 172,864 Oppose Moore (D) Win
Utah’s 2nd district $ 180,308 Support J. Matheson (D) Win
New York’s 19th district $ 192,206 Oppose Hall (D)* Win
Arkansas’s 4th district $ 223,148 Support Ross (D) Win
New Mexico’s 2nd district $ 239,739 Oppose Teague (D)* Win
Pennsylvania’s 3rd district $ 248,500 Oppose Dahlkemper (D)* Win
Colorado’s 4th district $ 250,000 Oppose B. Markey (D)* Win
Indiana Senate $ 250,000 Oppose Ellsworth (D)** Win
Florida’s 24th district $ 250,000 Oppose Kosmas (D)* Win
Ohio’s 15th district $ 261,735 Oppose Kilroy (D)* Win
Wisconsin’s 7th district $ 266,593 Oppose Lassa (D) Win
North Dakota’s 1st district $ 273,525 Oppose Pomeroy (D)* Win
Illinois’s 11th district $ 300,000 Oppose Halvorson (D)* Win
Pennsylvania’s 10th district $ 398,365 Oppose Carney (D)* Win
Ohio’s 16th district $ 421,315 Oppose Boccieri (D)* Win
Virginia’s 5th district $ 442,765 Oppose Perriello (D)* Win
Nevada’s 3rd district $ 449,850 Oppose Titus (D)* Win
Wisconsin Senate $ 748,300 Oppose Feingold (D)* Win
Missouri Senate $ 1,110,461 Oppose Carnahan (D) Win
Kentucky Senate $ 1,254,010 Oppose Conway (D) Win
Illinois Senate $ 1,682,856 Oppose Giannoulis (D) Win
Pennsylvania Senate $ 1,692,056 Oppose Sestak (D)** Win
Florida Senate $ 2,000,000 Oppose Crist (I) Win
New Hampshire Senate $ 2,324,730 Oppose Hodes (D)* Win
Total $ 16,971,730  

* - Incumbent
** - Running for Senate

On the flip side, the Chamber spent $ 11.4 million on races it lost. However, that figure is deceptive since nearly $ 5 million of that amount went to unsuccessfully defeat Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA).


Tagged with:

Editor’s Note: In the final 100 days before Election Day, CNN has been profiling one race at random each day from among the nation’s top 100 House races, which we’ve dubbed “The CNN 100.” Read the full list here.

Today’s featured district is: Texas 17th District
Primary: March 2nd
Where: East Texas
Days until election: 5

Rep. Chet Edwards (D-Texas) knows a bit about close calls when it comes to elections. He edged out Republican opponent Rob Curnock by 53 % to 45% in 2008, but 2010 might be an even tougher fight.

Edwards is facing Republican Bill Flores, a former oil and gas executive, who has racked up some hefty endorsements from Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney despite the fact that he has no political experience.

As the chairman of the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Subcommittee and the co-chairman of the House Army Caucus veterans, Edwards has enjoyed strong support from veterans groups.

Throughout the campaign, Edwards has touted his credentials on military issues and his ‘no vote’ for the Obama administration’s health care bill.

Yet Flores has emphasized Edwards’ ties to Obama administration policies and has attacked Edwards’ votes for the stimulus bill and the Troubled Asset Relief Program, also known as the bank bailout.

According to a recent Hill poll, Flores is leading Edwards 52 percent to 40 with 7 percent of likely voters undecided. The survey consisted of 404 phone interviews among likely voters and has a sampling error of plus or minus 4.9 percent.

CNN Political Ticker

Tagged with:

From a debate last night in New York’s 22nd Congressional District, we find a prime example of why our national debt now stands at over $ 13,000,000,000,000 in the person of Maurice Hinchey, who has represented the District since 1993:

H/T: Hot Air

Outside the Beltway

Tagged with:

Slip, Sliding Away … Harry Reid now trails Republican and Tea Party candidate Sharon Angle in two polls. The Republican possible takeover of the US Senate is in play.

Do we really need another Obama pet in the US Senate?

With less than 30 days to go before the 2010 midterm elections, Republican challenger for the Nevada US Senate seat leads incumbent Nevada Senator and current Democrat Senate Majority leader Harry Reid in a CNN poll and in a Fox News one as well. Harry Reid gets low job approval numbers (see complete data) as well does Barack Obama. It is hard to imagine with the trending pattern, the Republican enthusiasm, the anti-Democrat incumbent sentiment and the political environment that Reid will win this race. Reid only had a 1% lead in the last Rasmussen poll; however, no polling data has been done in October. What is evident in recent polling is that undecideds are starting to break toward the republican challenger Sharon Angle.

In the latest Fox News battleground state poll of likely voters, Angle drew 49 percent to Reid’s 46 percent. As voters make up their mind with four weeks to go until Election Day, Angle seems to have the edge.

In the first Fox battleground poll in the Silver State four weeks ago, 10 percent of respondents were either unsure, in favor of a minor party candidate or, as state law allows in Nevada, planning to vote for “none of these candidates.”

However, as stated at Hot Air, no individual is really going to take the time to go vote and either waste their vote or check none of the above. In such an important race with so much on the line and a midterm, those going to the polls to vote will most likely cast one for either Angle or Reid. 

A hat tip to Jammie Wearing Fool for the VIDEO below of the progress we have made under the one party rule of Obama, Pelosi and Reid. A major reason why Republicans are ahead in so many polls leading up to the 2010 midterm elections … the November 2 vote will be a national referendum on Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.

Voters in November you have the chance this November 2, 2010 in the midterm elections to make Democrats and Barack Obama eat their words and make them pay for not listening to the American people,  ”You would be think they would be saying thank you”.

We are making Progress according to Barack Obama


Republican Governors Association

Remember this lie told by Obama. Sorry, we live in a PC world, it was a falsehood:  With Obamacare your employer would see insurance premiums fall by as much as 3000%, which means they could give you a raise.  The truth: Insurance premiums jumped 20%.

Share This

Scared Monkeys

Tagged with:


A new ad in West Virginia goes after Nick Rahall with a video of him campaigning for Barack Obama in 2008 and discussing having chaired Arab Americans for Obama (he’s of Lebanese descent). 

The sinister music sort of says it all.

Huffington Post, which poked around a bit, speculates that the group behind it is tied to the local coal industry, but they don’t disclose donors.

Add to Twitter
Add to Facebook
Email this Article
Add to digg
Add to
Add to Google
Add to StumbleUpon

Ben Smith’s Blog

Tagged with:

More trouble for Democrats leading up to the 2010 midterm elections … Another Tea Party in Massachusetts.

Could there be another Boston Tea Party this year in the Massachusetts Governors race? Could there be another Scott Brown moment this November? According to a new Boston Globe poll, Republican Charles D. Baker has pulled even with incumbent, Democrat Governor Deval Patrick in the Massachusetts gubernatorial race. The Globe must be nashing their teeth on this one, the LEFT can hardly claim that the poll is Tea Party or right leaning.

The poll results also suggest that independent Timothy P. Cahill is pulling voters equally from Baker and Patrick, raising questions about the conventional political thinking that his candidacy is undercutting Baker’s chance to defeat the governor in the Nov. 2 election.

In the Globe poll, taken last week, Patrick, a Democrat, won support from 35 percent of likely voters, compared with 34 percent for Baker, a statistical tie given the poll’s margin of error. Cahill, the state treasurer who left the Democratic Party last year, continued to lag far behind with 11 percent. Green-Rainbow candidate Jill Stein got 4 percent, and 14 percent said they remain undecided.

Rasmussen has the race as a 3% point lead for Deval Patrick; however, the polling data hardly looks favorable for Democrats Patrick or President Obama. In fact, one would almost question that the data is from the “blue” state of Massachusetts. However, this is the state of the political environment against incumbent Democrats.

With less than 40 days to go before the 2010 midterm elections, the polls are trending against Deval Patrick and the momentum seems to be on the side of Republican Charles Baker. Voter turn out and enthusiasm will be the key in 2010 and according to the Globe, the current trend favors Baker as Republicans are much more enthusiastic about the election than Democrats.  Patrick is also having polling issues with independents, as are most Democrats this election cycle.

Some 78 percent of likely GOP voters say they are excited about the race, compared with only 37 percent of likely Democratic voters. Among the subset of 245 voters surveyed who said they were excited about the race, Baker beat Patrick, 52 to 25 percent.

“The energy in this election is certainly on the Republican side,’’ said Andrew E. Smith, director of the University of New Hampshire Survey Center, which conducted the poll for the Globe.

More terrible polling numbers for Patrick and the reverse negative Obama coattails:

Smith said that one of the most significant findings — especially damaging to Patrick as he celebrates the state’s recent economic gains — is that voters are still pessimistic about the direction of the state’s economy. More than half of respondents, 59 percent, cited jobs and the economy as the most important problem facing Massachusetts, far more than any other issue.

Patrick has other hurdles, notably a prevailing anti-incumbent mood. A majority of likely voters polled, 52 percent, said they want a new group of leaders in Washington and Massachusetts; only 29 percent said they trust the current leadership. Patrick’s job approval rating continues to remains low, as well. Only 40 percent of likely voters say they approve of the job he is doing, while 48 percent disapprove.

Will Obama go to Massuchusettsand work his miracles like he did for Martha Coakly against Scott Brown. Oh, that’s right … the Democrats lost the UIS Senate seat formerly held by Ted Kennedy.

Share This

Scared Monkeys

Tagged with:

This article is wonderful.  Read the whole thing.  Here’s the drill …

  • Was an invite to debate by pub challenger Jim Renacci to Rep. John Boccieri, freshman democrat (OH016).  Declined.
  • Renacci held townhall meeting in lieu.
  • Boccieri plants dem operative in audience, and holds meeting with 30 other activists.
  • En masse, Boccieri and activists show up, doing a last-second acceptance of debate.
  • Activists use attack questions on Renacci, videotape, and publish answers out of context.
  • Olbermann airs tape.

These people are D-E-S-P-E-R-A-T-E.

Loving it.  Just loving it.  The good people of Ohio’s 16th District need full disclosure on this bit of pathetic campaigning.  Renacci has a bunch of money - he needs to make this a campaign ad.  Now.

Any Conservative special-interest group out there willing to help?

Liberty Pundits Blog

Tagged with:


Hey now, ingrates. She’s doing this for you. “Believe you me, the easier path would be to pack it all up and go do something different,” she said. “If I had not heard this call from Alaskans, I would not be deliberating as I am.”… “It is people from all walks of life, every corner [...]

Read this post »

Hot Air » Top Picks

Tagged with:

How come the MSM is not calling incumbent Democrat US Senator Blanche Lincoln unelectable in Arkansas?

In the poll, commissioned by the Arkansas News Bureau/Stephens Media by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research survey, Republican challenger John Boozman has a 17 point lead over incumbent Democrat Blanche Lincoln for the US Senate seat in Arkansas. Boozman leads 51% to 34% over Lincoln. 34%!!!

In the poll, commissioned by the Arkansas News Bureau/Stephens Media and conducted Sunday through Tuesday, 51 percent of respondents said they would vote for Boozman if the election were held today, while 34 percent said they would vote for Lincoln.

The margin between Boozman and Lincoln was unchanged from a similar poll conducted in early May, when 52 percent favored Boozman and 35 percent said they would vote for Lincoln. That match-up was hypothetical at the time because Boozman and Lincoln had not yet won their parties’ nominations.

As bad as this poll is, it is not even close to the reality of how badly that Democrats and Blance Lincolm will lose in the 2010 midterm elections. Rasmussenhas the race Boozman 65%, Lincoln 27%. That is correct, a 38% advantage for the Republican Senate challenger.

Hotline on call states, there is still more than a month to go, but at this point these numbers suggest Arkansas will be a near-certain pickup for the GOP. No, this one is over, stick a fork in it.

Share This

Scared Monkeys

Tagged with:

Survey USA: If the election were held Thursday, the News7 SurveyUSA poll indicates that Hurt would defeat Perriello 61 percent to 35 percent. Laughing … Perriello was always a dick.

Liberty Pundits Blog

Tagged with: