Generic Congressional Ballot: Republicans 46%, Democrats 36%

Rasmussen Reports ^ | 04/19/10

[Artemis Webb]

I frankly think a takeover of the House is a long shot. I do believe though that we can make some pretty major inroads and significantly weaken Pelosi.

[SmokingJoe]

Historically speaking voters tend to reelect THEIR incumbent congressman. While they might blame or think poorly of the performance of one particular party they tend to think, “Yeah but our guy's okay”. In other words when it comes time to vote there is nobody named “Joe Generic” on the ballot.

In 2008, plenty of GOP incumbents were beaten, because voter were out to vote against anyone with an (R) after their name. This year, because of the hated 0bamcare, cap and trade, bailouts, record deficits, out of control spending etc, voters are even angrier against the Democrats than they were against the Republicans in 2008. Plus in 2008, Rasmussen had the Democrats ahead by 7 points in the generic congressional poll and the Democrats ended up beating the GOP by 79 seats in the House elections.
This year, not only is the GOP is ahead of the Democrats by 10% in the Rasmussen generic congressional poll by a massive 10%(bigger than the Democrats poll lead in 2008), but Republican voters are vastly more energized,angry and determined to vote than they were even in 1994, when the Democrats got clobbered but good.
The Democrats are going to get slaughtered in November. And you can quote me on that.

[SmokingJoe]

I frankly think a takeover of the House is a long shot

It's going to take a force majeure to prevent a GOP takeover of the House. There has never been a case where any party is ahead by 7-10% in the Rasmussen generic congressional polls or ahead by over 2 points in the RCP generic congressional poll average, and that party has not ended winning the House. You can't be ahead by 10% and then somehow manage to lose in the districts.
It's like the presidential elections. If you are ahead in the overall polls by say 5%, it's virtually impossible for you to end up losing in the electoral college votes.

[freespirited]

It is a matter of historical trends. See Smokin Joe’s explanation below.

I can’t recall the GOP having a lead this large in decades.

[freespirited]

Of course I meant above. Below your post, above mine.

[tom h]

Almost impossible to manufacture votes in an off-year. Turnout is too low and an inner city precinct can’t have empty booths all day yet claim 99% turnout like they usually do for Presidential elections.

[tom h]

" The time for an Amnesty Bill won't come until after the November election. If there is a GOP blowout, count on Reid and Pelosi to call a lame duck session between the election and the installation of the new Congress in January. It would actually be easier for them to pass Amnesty in this environment than before the election. They can tell all the defeated Democrats that they've nothing more to lose, they'll be rewarded with federal jobs and union sinecures...and they can insure the ascendancy of the Democrat party for a generation. "

Actually, I think the Democrats wouldn't dare try it after a GOP blowout in November. Because voters are simple and would punish the Dems dearly come the following election.

No, I think BHO would tell them "elections have consequences" and put a stop to it.

Don't get me wrong, I think that many members will wish they could do it. But they won't.

[nathanbedford]

I have three points to make:

First, the Democrats are actually in worse shape than the raw numbers suggest because of the dual impact of intensity/apathy. We have noted the intensity on the conservative side but it is likely that there will be a high degree of apathy on the Democrat side which will further depress their turnout, especially among non-African-American voters. Which brings me to my second point,

Second, the Democrats must count on 90% or better of the African American vote to win national elections but much of this vote is concentrated in black districts leaving fewer Democrats to compete with non-African-Americans in suburban and ex-urban districts. My maxim of American politics, all politics in America is not local but racial, means that in statewide and nationwide races the African American vote is very important and liable to tip the balance. But in local congressional elections the opposite can be true. I believe it will be true this time.

Third, those few Democrats with conscience, usually those who described themselves as "blue dogs" have up until now, and will through the November elections, be confronted with a choice of accepting a stab in the back from their own party or facing the wrath of an aroused citizenry directly on election day. Since the George Soros' takeover of the Democratic Party which he accomplished through seizing control of the purse, control of the propaganda arms of the party, and by elevating Barack Obama, the Democrat party has become almost Stalinist in its doctrinal rigidity. It has also become almost Stalinist (if Chris Matthews can misappropriate the word so can I) in its discipline and control over the party.

That is why Obama was able to get health care through. A rational if unprincipled representative calculated that the odds were better by staying with the party than bucking it. If they lost their election because of the backlash of the electorate, there was always the possibility of a sinecure or a lobbying position, or even, as history is shown, marriage into the first family. If they buck the party they would lose the primary and probably the general election anyway.

After November, the equation changes for those "persuadable" Democrats to whom one might appeal with reason in the hope, however tenuous, that they were amenable to reason. After November most of the persuadable Democrats will have been defeated because they are in the vulnerable districts. After the election, then, they will have absolutely nothing to gain by bucking the party and if they do they will forfeit any chance to advance themselves as party apparatchiks.

I believe that the Democratic Party has become so thoroughly corrupt under the influence of George Soros and through the outworking of the Chicago style politics implemented by Obama, Emmanuel, and the rest that one ought not to expect that party to behave rationally or in accordance with historical norms. We should not expect a period of triangulation that we saw after the contract with America set Bill Clinton back because, unlike Clinton who was a self promoter, Obama is an ideologue who will exploit the machinery at his fingertips scarcely less obsessively than the mullahs of Iran.

Therefore, I do not expect to see any moderation in Democrat usurpations after November and before the new Congress takes over.

[karnage]

Well said.

[little jeremiah]

Very interesting and well thought comments.

[nathanbedford]

Thanks.

[riri]

I am convinced the rank and file Joe Six Pack vote “the last boom”. That is partially how Hussein got elected. People associated Democrats with the dot com boom. Before the election I actually had drones telling me how good Dmeocrats were for the economy and pointed to Clinton. Obama destroyed that memory. Now they will remember the good times and flowing wine of the Bush years.

[SmokingJoe]

Very good analysis. Couldn't agree with you more.

[o2bfree]

Voice of Pessimism

[Artemis Webb]

"Voice of Pessimism"

Not at all. If I expect too much I'm usually disappointed. If I temper my enthusiasm I'm often pleasantly surprised. I sat on FR during the elections of 96 and 08 and watched fellow FReepers crow about how the momentum favored the GOP in the general election and how we were going to win. This of course did not come to pass. In other words I've been accused of being the voice of pessimism before.

On top of that I'm not sure how my belief that we will make major gains in the House is pessimistic.

[justiceseeker93]

Hope the WH finds this amusing.

Establishment 'Rats generally don't consider Rasmussen to be an accurate pollster. They would prefer to look at the numerous pro-'Rat pollsters such as NY Times, CBS, Quinnipiac, Marist, Pew, WaPo, Gallup, etc., rather than Ras, whom they consider to be biased toward the Pubbies.

But now even those other polls are showing at least a slight margin for the GOP in the generic ballot. And O's speech last night is not likely to give the 'Rats much of a bump at all, as it was panned even by most of the MSM.

I was starting to get a bit concerned when the GOP margin in the Ras Generic ballot had shrunk down to +5 about a month ago, but it looks now that it was just a little blip in the trend.

[justiceseeker93]

The Democrats are actually in worse shape than the raw numbers suggest because of the dual impact of intensity/apathy.

I'm not too sure about that. Rasmussen's technique of including "likely voters" only may correct for the enthusiasm gap, which, as you say, is definitely there.

[1035rep]

I hope the Rats live in denial until November.

[justiceseeker93]

Manufacturing over 10% [of] the total votes to ensure victory could be real problem for the Democrats.

Yes, especially when you consider that, historically, most of their "vote manufacturing" activities occur in congressional districts which they figure to win convincingly anyway. Whatever they manufacture, if it makes any difference at all, figures to be more likely to allow them to steal occasional senatorial and gubernatorial races than to steal a bunch of House races.

[1035rep]

Well said.