Sunday, August 01, 2010

House Dems Will Take a Thumping in November

Intrade odds for Republicans to control the House after the November elections rose today  to the highest level in the contract's history: 58.6% (see chart above).  When Obama took office in January 2009, the Intrade odds were only 15% that the Republicans would control the House in 2010, and those odds have consistently risen and have been trading above 50% since late June. 

In Michael Barone's latest column, he surveys the most recent polling data and writes that "most signs suggest Democrats will take a thumping this year."  Michael concludes that:

"These metrics -- the generic ballot results and polls in individual districts -- suggest that House Democrats are headed toward historic losses. Quite a swing in 18 months."

In addition to the polling data, the "pay-to-play" futures contracts at Intrade support Barone's conclusion.   

24 Comments:

At 8/01/2010 12:01 PM, Blogger NC said...

Signs that adults are taking notice, which is not good for a Democrat party parent-child agenda...

Slate discovers that the internal combustion engine is here to stay and that Obama's green job agenda is a sham: http://bit.ly/a8LeJ8

Hot Air reminds all that a government subsidy uses your money: http://bit.ly/bureZR

Ted Nugent reminds the public that a majority chose to skip due-diligence, choosing a false reality to provide comfort to their emotions: http://bit.ly/cNVDuO

Ignorance is expensive.

 
At 8/01/2010 1:37 PM, Blogger Benjamin said...

More Red State Socialist Empire lard to come!
The Red Bloc--those rural Republican states will get fresh infusions of U.S. gummit moola.
Check out Tax Foundation data. A state like Kentucky receives $4000 per capita net from the federal government. %1.511 for every $1 sent to DC.
You know how when you listen to country music radio that songs are always so patriotic?
Dang sure--I would love the federal government too if I got $4000 net per year.
Rural roads, water systems, power systems, telephones, airports, rail stops, even crops all subsidized.
It will be fun to watch Rand Paul should he win the Senate seat in Kentucky. Sure, let's cut federal programs--except the lard coming to Kentucky, that's different.
Kentucky would collapse w/o constant federal subsidies, and would likely empty out, as would much of rural America.

 
At 8/01/2010 3:40 PM, Blogger morganovich said...

there is actually considerable evidence the the best situation for the economy is a split government with one party holding the white house and the other the legislature.

this keeps either group from running its playbook and passing out too much pork, so we tend to get more reasonable, moderate policy.

the best clinton years had a republican congress, the best bush years, a democratic one.

in terms of being short sighted avaricious pork shovelers and overspenders, republicans and democrats are essentially coke vs pepsi. it's just a question of "how do you want your money wasted?"

it's a sad statement that "gridlock" seems to be the best we can hope for from DC...

 
At 8/01/2010 5:38 PM, Blogger Paul said...

"More Red State Socialist Empire lard to come!"

Not to worry, Benji, nobody can top your boyfriend and the Pelosi Democrats.

"Rural roads, water systems, power systems, telephones, airports, rail stops, even crops all subsidized."

Don't forget to add the billions in rural broadband your boyfriend is adding to the mix.

 
At 8/01/2010 6:30 PM, Blogger Bill said...

Benjamin: Let's drop the charade. What you are spouting is simply not consistent with the facts as I have demonstrated previously. You have been exposed as a fraud - nothing more than a leftist crank.

 
At 8/01/2010 6:54 PM, Blogger Benjamin said...

Bill-

In what way have you exposed anyone as a fraud?

Instead of personal attacks on me--kill the messenger--why not go to The Tax Foundation--a very conservative organization--and see the facts for yourself. What I have stated about Kentucky is true.

The Red State Socialists Empire is the concubine of the Reagan-Bush "Deficit Don't Matter" wing of the R-Party.

A marriage made in Heaven (or perhaps another afterlife home)!

Rather than bash me, you shoudl spread the word--maybe the R-Party can be saved, and we can get back the Everett Dirksens or Tafts. I doubt it.

Right now, even the ultra-conservative Redleaf/Vigilante call the R-Party a ring of grifters.

Argue with them, in their fine book, "Panic."

 
At 8/01/2010 7:06 PM, Blogger Paul said...

"why not go to The Tax Foundation--a very conservative organization--and see the facts for yourself. What I have stated about Kentucky is true."

Benji already knows what the Tax Foundation says about the disparities. They say the most important factor is the progressive income tax.
When I pointed this out, Benji actually told me the Republican party champions the progressive income tax, apparently in secret.

True story.

 
At 8/01/2010 7:09 PM, Blogger Paul said...

"The Red State Socialists Empire is the concubine of the Reagan-Bush "Deficit Don't Matter" wing of the R-Party."

Ain't it amazing Benji can make these kind of statements in the face of the exponentially worse debt his boyfriend and the Pelosi Democrats are ringing up?

 
At 8/01/2010 10:17 PM, Blogger moneybagzz said...

Just my $0.02 but all I want to see are three things:
[a] Wide ranging, across-the-board, economy-growing TAX CUTS.
[b] DEAD TERRORISTS courtesy of USAF drones, USMC marksmanship and US ARMY combat proficiency (mix-and-match amongst those, if you will).
[c] Nancy Pelosi in a conversation w/ Harry Reid on the unemployment line.

 
At 8/01/2010 10:42 PM, Blogger juandos said...

Well speaking of pseudo benny's boyfriend have you seen how he has that Government Motors company we all bought into as as overburdened taxpayers mumming along just like a Swiss watch?

Remember when you read about the Chevy Volt the Nissan Leaf is $25,280 with the federal tax credit...

The Value of a Volt

The money line: Since 2012 production will be scaled back if early sales are disappointing, it might be more logical to add the subsidies to the first 10,000 units only, which would leave early adopters outside of California paying $33,500 for a car which actually costs $81,000 per unit, with taxpayers picking up the remainder. It’s actually even worse than that, because GM expects to lose money on every Volt sale...

 
At 8/02/2010 6:54 AM, Blogger sykes.1 said...

The key problem is the lame duck session. All those Democrats voted out of office can take pleasure in passing all of their most extreme legislation. The new Congress, even with majorities in both houses, will not be able to repeal or unfund any of the new laws. To do so would require the ability to over-ride vetoes. In practice this requires more than 2/3 majorities in both Houses because of the Rino investattion.

Socialist America is comming, and it is permanent.

 
At 8/02/2010 7:56 AM, Blogger juandos said...

"The new Congress, even with majorities in both houses, will not be able to repeal or unfund any of the new laws. To do so would require the ability to over-ride vetoes. In practice this requires more than 2/3 majorities in both Houses because of the Rino investattion[infestation?]"...

Well sykes.1 I do believe you make a very valid point here...

Still, how many people want to see more of this?

(3 minute, 36 second video cip): Democratic Congressman Pete Stark's comments

 
At 8/02/2010 8:07 AM, Blogger Paul said...

Sykes,

I share your concern, but the Senate GOP might be able to thwart the Democrats during the lame duck session. Keep in mind the winner of the Delaware Senate race will be seated immediately after the election, and it looks like the Republican candidate is going to win it.

 
At 8/02/2010 11:19 AM, Blogger Jason said...

Moneybagzz, Nancy Pilosi will never lose her district. Ever. There are so many bleeding hearts and anchors and spendthrifts and nut jobs in her district, I wouldn't be surprised if she ran unopposed.

Ok, if she was caught on tape smoking crack, using the n-word while praising the wisdom of Osama bin Laden as she made an IED to kill American soldiers in Afghanistan - then maybe...maybe her fruit-and-nut voters will choose a different democrat.

 
At 8/02/2010 12:03 PM, Blogger Benjamin said...

Sykes-
Socialist Ameica came to farm country back in the 1930s, when a young TX congressman named LBJ figured out he could get the federal government to pay for TX farmers to have electricty...what started as a trickle has become a permanent river of fat for the 21 farm or rural states. You have 42 Senators in the Red Bloc--impervious to anything you and I could do to unseat them.

 
At 8/02/2010 12:15 PM, Blogger Paul said...

"You have 42 Senators in the Red Bloc--impervious to anything you and I could do to unseat them."

Leave aside how many Democrats are in that Red Bloc, once including Benji's boyfriend, federal spending has exploded by 38% since Pelosi took over. If we could roll back spending to FY2007 levels we be roughly at a balance budget.

 
At 8/02/2010 12:27 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

Jason, Pelosi is not run unopposed, John Dennis is running against her. He may not unseat her, but she can't likely ignore him either.

 
At 8/02/2010 1:07 PM, Blogger morganovich said...

ron-

i live in SF and know john dennis personally. he's an interesting guy, but trust me, his candidacy is going nowhere. pelosi has a mortal lock here. the 2nd finisher in the last election was cindy sheehan with 16% of the vote. even with that vote split, nancy got 72%. dennis hopes to be able to push her on some issues, but i have some serious doubts it'll work despite my hope that it will. (FWIW, i voted for him in the primary)

however, on a brighter note, there is a real shot that the healthcare bill could be removed. when the congress passed it, they failed to include a severability clause. that's a pretty glaring omission as such language is generally pretty boiler plate.

what this means is that if any clause in the law is invalidated, the whole bill is invalidated.

that makes the stakes in lawsuits like this one

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/40550.html

very high. i've heard a number of pundits and scholars dismiss the chances of such a strategy, but i'm not so sure.

it's certainly a novel application of the commerce clause. it seems to me that NOT buying a good or service is pretty much the definition of not engaging in commerce, much less interstate commerce.

nowhere in the commerce clause as written does there appear to be any ability to compel commerce, only to regulate it, which is quite a different matter.

i am admittedly not a constitutional scholar, but this seems pretty straightforward to me.

even if this fails, all that need happen is one invalidation of one other part of the bill, and "poof" it's all gone.

that seems a more likely outcome than outright repeal.

(it does leave the question of "how could such a landmark bill have been passed with such a glaring omission/weakness"? was it just incompetence, or was it a way to drag some fence sitters in by tacitly admitting that it was unlikely to stand?)

 
At 8/02/2010 9:22 PM, Blogger juandos said...

Thanks for the link morganovich to that Politico story: Judge greenlights health reform suit...

Note the White House's whimpering response...

 
At 8/02/2010 11:29 PM, Blogger Bill said...

Benji: "Socialist Ameica came to farm country back in the 1930s, when a young TX congressman named LBJ figured out he could get the federal government to pay for TX farmers to have electricty"

Unmentioned by Benji is that LBJ was the archetypal socialist Democrat. And Democrats to this day defend such subsidies. The truth however, as I have demonstrated before, is that rural subsidies constitute a vanishingly small portion of the federal budget. Benji just uses this foolishness to provide cover for the true American socialists, the modern Democrat Party.

 
At 8/02/2010 11:35 PM, Blogger Bill said...

BTW Benji, pointing out that particular states may receive more in federal funds that other states is not relevant to the discussion. You need to drill down a bit farther to see who among the citizens of these states are receiving the transfer payments.

For example, I live in a very politically conservative area which has a large minority community which receives vast quantities of federal monies. This fact is not my fault or the fault of my fellow conservatives here but it is instead the fault of those who have their hands out and those who are playing Santa Claus with taxpayer money (read the Democrats). So again, let's drop the ruse and focus on the real problem here: you and your fellow travelers in the Democrat Party.

 
At 8/03/2010 12:19 AM, Blogger Ron H. said...

morganovich said:

"however, on a brighter note, there is a real shot that the healthcare bill could be removed. when the congress passed it, they failed to include a severability clause. that's a pretty glaring omission as such language is generally pretty boiler plate."

I love it! I was really excited for about 5 minutes until I came to my senses and remembered that in the world of political reality, what might seem sensible to most people, doesn't much matter.

After the incredible abuses in the GM takeover, anything is possible.

"it's certainly a novel application of the commerce clause. it seems to me that NOT buying a good or service is pretty much the definition of not engaging in commerce, much less interstate commerce."

The commerce clause has been used in the past in ways that boggle the mind:

- in Wickard v Filburn an Ohio farmer who grew wheat on his own property to feed his chickens was found to have had an impact on interstate commerce because if he had not grown his own he would have bought wheat, an interstate commodity, thus affecting commerce.

- in Gonzales v Raich a woman who grew her own medical marijuana was successfully prosecuted under the commerce clause for affecting interstate commerce even though the interstate commerce in marijuana is illegal, and even though she grew and used it legally in California!

So, I'm not sure that simple reason or logic will be of much help with this Obamacare abomination.

"...how could such a landmark bill have been passed with such a glaring omission/weakness?"

Well, I can only imagine that with so much staff working so many hours on this hurried monster, everyone assumed that the simple boilerplate stuff was in place, so efforts were focused on the incomprehensible stuff. I'll bet some heads have rolled.

 
At 8/03/2010 9:05 AM, Blogger Paul said...

Bill,

"Unmentioned by Benji is that LBJ was the archetypal socialist Democrat. And Democrats to this day defend such subsidies."

I'm sure you'd agree there are lots of GOP'ers who do also. It boils down to this: there are alot of bad Republicans, but there are no good Democrats. Benji is a joke because he claims to be a True Economic Conseervative, but heaps all the blame on the party that doesn't nominate socialist community organizers to the highest office in the land.

 
At 8/03/2010 11:21 AM, Blogger Bill said...

Paul: We are in complete agreement. Of course there are Republican politicians who spend too much and who are not right on all the issues and there are even a few Democrat politicians who are right on some issues. The point is, on balance, the Democrats are far more leftist and socialist on every issue than are Republicans.

Since I do not vote for third parties who have ideological purity but have no chance of winning, I habitually vote for the most conservative Republican running in my area.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home