Posted on 10/18/2013 2:32:45 PM PDT by neverdem
The consensus (more or less) among political analysts was that the GOP was likely to lose in the shutdown showdown, but was unlikely to suffer serious electoral consequences. The first prediction appears to be the case (but see Peter Beinart's smart contrarian take). How about the second one?
It is early, but what evidence we have seems consistent with the idea that the GOP didn’t take on much electoral water from this loss. This isn’t to say that there isn’t any evidence that the shutdown hurt Republicans, but the idea that their prospects were seriously jeopardized is thin.
Start with Wednesday night’s Senate election in New Jersey. Democrat Cory Booker defeated Republican Steve Lonegan by just over 10 points, 54.6 percent to 44.3 percent. This result is right in the middle of previous Republican gubernatorial and Senate performances in the state (gubernatorial races are in odd years; Senate races are typically in even years):
In fact, the result was closer to John Kerry’s 2004 victory margin (6.7 points) than to Barack Obama’s 2012 margin (17.8 points).
To be clear, this was an off-year special election held on a Wednesday. We’d probably expect a drop-off in Democratic performance given this, especially from Obama’s numbers.
But Lonegan was a problematic candidate: a “true conservative” running unabashedly as such. Booker has been tagged a rising Democratic superstar, who also should have theoretically benefited from his status as mayor of the state’s largest city. Indeed, Essex County was one of three counties where Booker ran roughly even with the president (Bergen and Hudson, also in northern New Jersey, are the other two).
This isn’t a bad showing for a Democrat. It’s about what you would expect in neutral circumstances in the state. But that’s just the point: If the bottom were dropping out...
(Excerpt) Read more at dyn.realclearpolitics.com ...
And probably will be until being indicted. RATS are notorious for dropping support for anyone who produces bad optics.
| Poll | Date | Sample | Democrats | Republicans | Spread |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RCP Average | 10/4 - 10/13 | -- | 46.8 | 41.3 | Democrats +5.5 |
| Pew Research | 10/9 - 10/13 | 1259 RV | 49 | 43 | Democrats +6 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 10/7 - 10/13 | 3500 LV | 45 | 38 | Democrats +7 |
| Democracy Corps (D) | 10/6 - 10/8 | 860 LV | 47 | 43 | Democrats +4 |
| PPP (D) | 10/4 - 10/6 | 1000 RV | 46 | 41 | Democrats +5 |
| Poll | Date | Sample | Democrats | Republicans | Spread |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RCP Average | 10/4 - 10/13 | -- | 46.8 | 41.3 | Democrats +5.5 |
| Pew Research | 10/9 - 10/13 | 1259 RV | 49 | 43 | Democrats +6 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 10/7 - 10/13 | 3500 LV | 45 | 38 | Democrats +7 |
| Democracy Corps (D) | 10/6 - 10/8 | 860 LV | 47 | 43 | Democrats +4 |
| PPP (D) | 10/4 - 10/6 | 1000 RV | 46 | 41 | Democrats +5 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 9/30 - 10/6 | 3500 LV | 40 | 40 | Tie |
| Rasmussen Reports | 9/23 - 9/29 | 3500 LV | 42 | 38 | Democrats +4 |
| Quinnipiac | 9/23 - 9/29 | 1497 RV | 43 | 34 | Democrats +9 |
| PPP (D) | 9/25 - 9/26 | 790 RV | 45 | 40 | Democrats +5 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 9/16 - 9/22 | 3500 LV | 40 | 37 | Democrats +3 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 9/9 - 9/15 | 3500 LV | 38 | 38 | Tie |
| Rasmussen Reports | 9/2 - 9/8 | 3500 LV | 39 | 39 | Tie |
| Rasmussen Reports | 8/26 - 9/1 | 3500 LV | 39 | 37 | Democrats +2 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 8/19 - 8/25 | 3500 LV | 38 | 39 | Republicans +1 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 8/12 - 8/18 | 3500 LV | 38 | 38 | Tie |
| Rasmussen Reports | 8/5 - 8/11 | 3500 LV | 39 | 39 | Tie |
| Rasmussen Reports | 7/29 - 8/4 | 3500 LV | 38 | 41 | Republicans +3 |
| Quinnipiac | 7/28 - 7/31 | 1468 RV | 40 | 36 | Democrats +4 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 7/22 - 7/28 | 3500 LV | 39 | 38 | Democrats +1 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 7/15 - 7/21 | 3500 LV | 40 | 38 | Democrats +2 |
| Democracy Corps (D) | 7/10 - 7/15 | 841 LV | 43 | 44 | Republicans +1 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 7/8 - 7/14 | 3500 LV | 38 | 39 | Republicans +1 |
| Quinnipiac | 6/28 - 7/8 | 2014 RV | 39 | 34 | Democrats +5 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 7/1 - 7/7 | 3500 LV | 39 | 40 | Republicans +1 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 6/24 - 6/30 | 3500 LV | 38 | 39 | Republicans +1 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 6/17 - 6/23 | 3500 LV | 40 | 39 | Democrats +1 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 6/10 - 6/16 | 3500 LV | 39 | 39 | Tie |
| PPP (D) | 6/11 - 6/13 | 603 RV | 47 | 40 | Democrats +7 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 6/3 - 6/9 | 3500 LV | 40 | 38 | Democrats +2 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 5/27 - 6/2 | 3500 LV | 40 | 40 | Tie |
| Quinnipiac | 5/22 - 5/28 | 1419 RV | 38 | 38 | Tie |
| Rasmussen Reports | 5/20 - 5/26 | 3500 LV | 41 | 39 | Democrats +2 |
| ABC News/Wash Post | 5/16 - 5/19 | RV | 48 | 40 | Democrats +8 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 5/13 - 5/19 | 3500 LV | 39 | 40 | Republicans +1 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 5/6 - 5/11 | 3500 LV | 40 | 38 | Democrats +2 |
| PPP (D) | 5/6 - 5/9 | 1099 RV | 45 | 43 | Democrats +2 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 4/29 - 5/5 | 3500 LV | 40 | 38 | Democrats +2 |
| Quinnipiac | 4/25 - 4/29 | 1471 RV | 41 | 37 | Democrats +4 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 4/22 - 4/28 | 3500 LV | 39 | 40 | Republicans +1 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 4/15 - 4/21 | 3500 LV | 41 | 39 | Democrats +2 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 4/8 - 4/14 | 3500 LV | 42 | 38 | Democrats +4 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 4/1 - 4/7 | 3500 LV | 41 | 38 | Democrats +3 |
| Quinnipiac | 3/26 - 4/1 | 1711 RV | 43 | 35 | Democrats +8 |
| PPP (D) | 3/27 - 3/30 | 1247 RV | 46 | 42 | Democrats +4 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 3/25 - 3/31 | 3500 LV | 44 | 37 | Democrats +7 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 3/18 - 3/24 | 3500 LV | 43 | 38 | Democrats +5 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 3/11 - 3/17 | 3500 LV | 43 | 38 | Democrats +5 |
| Democracy Corps (D) | 3/9 - 3/12 | 840 LV | 46 | 42 | Democrats +4 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 3/4 - 3/10 | 3500 LV | 43 | 40 | Democrats +3 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 2/25 - 3/3 | 3500 LV | 43 | 40 | Democrats +3 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 2/18 - 2/24 | 3500 LV | 43 | 38 | Democrats +5 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 2/11 - 2/17 | 3500 LV | 43 | 37 | Democrats +6 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 2/4 - 2/10 | 3500 LV | 42 | 39 | Democrats +3 |
| PPP (D) | 1/31 - 2/3 | 800 RV | 45 | 45 | Tie |
| Rasmussen Reports | 1/28 - 2/3 | 3000 LV | 44 | 38 | Democrats +6 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 1/21 - 1/27 | 3000 LV | 45 | 37 | Democrats +8 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 1/14 - 1/20 | 3000 LV | 44 | 39 | Democrats +5 |
| Democracy Corps (D) | 1/10 - 1/14 | 852 LV | 46 | 42 | Democrats +4 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 1/7 - 1/13 | 3000 LV | 43 | 37 | Democrats +6 |
| PPP (D) | 1/3 - 1/6 | 1100 RV | 47 | 41 | Democrats +6 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 1/2 - 1/6 | 3000 LV | 44 | 38 | Democrats +6 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 12/26 - 12/30 | 3000 LV | 46 | 35 | Democrats +11 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 12/17 - 12/22 | 3500 LV | 44 | 38 | Democrats +6 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 12/10 - 12/16 | 3500 LV | 46 | 38 | Democrats +8 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 12/3 - 12/9 | 3500 LV | 46 | 36 | Democrats +10 |
| Politico/GWU/Battleground | 12/2 - 12/6 | 1000 LV | 45 | 42 | Democrats +3 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 11/26 - 12/2 | 3500 LV | 47 | 36 | Democrats +11 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 11/19 - 11/25 | 3500 LV | 45 | 40 | Democrats +5 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 11/12 - 11/18 | 3500 LV | 45 | 40 | Democrats +5 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 11/5 - 11/11 | 3500 LV | 45 | 42 | Democrats +3 |
I really wonder how many seats in Congress are truly up for grabs? I think most districts are either conservative or liberal and there isn’t much mix.
I’d bet that there are 12 or less seats that will actually be “in play” come next November.
I think the GOP loss was far far larger than any of the political pundits are saying.
Republicans took the country to the media manufactured brink to protect the country from ObamaCare and fiscal irresponsibility, which was all that could be done in the time frame.
THe Democrats and Obama have done everything they can to hide the true magnitude of the ObamaCare disaster.
In 90 days, when the budget authorization needs to be renewed, the country may have amuch more negative opinion of ObamaCare, the fiscal irresponsibility of the Democrats, the ObamaCare disaster, and Obama’s sinking personal popularity will be more apparent to the country.
This may give the Republicans some leverage.
It is also possible that the American people will stay in their fog, in which case the country is screwed and there is nothing the Republicans can do to turn things around.
The problem is not the Republicans, it is an American electorate that elected a guy like Obama to be President in the first place and then re elected him to a second term despite the incompetence, malfeasance and petty divisiveness of his first term.
In a year’s time it is going to be impossible for the Dems to get a net of 17 seats.
With amnesty on the cards the GOP will gain seats in Arizona that were spoiled by Libertarian candidates and turnout.
I hope Allen West runs again in the same district.
I'm surprised to that you think this. I never thought the battle was winnable. The left has the White House, the Senate and the media. We have the House. I always thought this was a forlorn hope, a Charge of the Light Brigade. Worthwhile for messaging purposes, but certain to go down to defeat. It wasn't a shameful defeat - victory was never in the cards. House GOP pols are simply back where they were before the shutdown, having demonstrated to the base that they tried, and to upper-income liberals and independents about to have their premiums go to the moon, that the GOP tried to keep that from happening. In the privacy of the voting booth in 2014, I suspect a lot of them will vote for the lesser of two evils - the GOP.
I agree. In all of the polls show dissatisfaction with the GOP rising, they failed to distinguish those conservatives who were dissatisfied with the GOP for being craven cowards on the battlefield.
McCain, Graham, Alexander, Cornyn, King, and all the rest of the surrender monkeys have nothing but my total disdain.
The Republicans exposed the heart and soul of their party.
To be more precise, this battle forced out in the open the divides within the party.
I don't see this as a loss. It may be a loss for a few Senators who were on the wrong side of the fight, but if they are from safe states and are replaced by stouter folk, then it's a trade up.
-PJ
The GOPe did NOTHING to engage vulnerable Dems during the months long run up to the shutdown or during it. If they take a hit it is COMPLETELY on them for tip toeing through the tulips while the Dems dropped daisy cutters on them from above.
I have heard that Lonegan got zero support from the state party and the Governor. I am going to have resist spitting in the face of the next person who says we have to elect RINO’s because they are better than the Democrats.
They are the same thing.
That's where I would bet my money. I cannot see the collective dumbbells that constitute the American electorate changing, not in my lifetime.
If people really hate Obamacare come next November, the GOP is going to be able to say we knew this pain was coming and that’s why we tried so hard to stop it. And because of the hype over the shutdown, people will remember that they’re telling the truth.
The one thing to worry about is that the GOP is hinging everything on the reception to Obamacare. If the polls show people love Obamacare this time next year, then the GOP is in major trouble. Of course the reception is bound to be mixed.
The worrisome thing is that Obamacare is designed to put much more of the middle class on this form of welfare than Obama’s other redistribution programs. It is designed to expand his loyal mooching voter base beyond the lower classes and up another economic tier. Hence why so many of the sign-up stories are from people who already could afford insurance but are now getting an Obamacare/taxpayer-funded discount. Every new government check that’s sent out is a new vote in the Democrats’ pocket.
It was very important to stop Obamacare any way we could before it took hold. Because this month’s plan didn’t work for whatever reason, the Democrats more than likely got a step closer to cementing permanent power. All the more reason though why this had to be tried no matter the long odds in successfully stopping Obamacare. Worst case scenario is that our electoral prospects were damned if we did and damned if we didn’t.
That's what's impressive about this. Lonegan got 45% with 1/10 Booker's money. In the midst of a shutdown that Lonegan supported vocally. I figured on a 20% loss. Or worse. NJ can be salvaged. The GOP just needs a more photogenic candidate. I like Lonegan, but I think a better-looking candidate could have made it closer or even won.
The GOP doesn’t need a more photogenic candidate. The GOP needs to stop acting against conservatives and fail to fund and support them, then ask for us to support their RINO’s
So... it’s business as usual in Washington; no one appears to be hurt by all the Mickey Mouse.
The only one to suffer adverse consequences is America.
Lonegan got nothing from the Republican Party. His performance should encourage people. It shows a wave of Tea Party support.
Lonegen 2014!
No, 4 million conservatives elected O. They did not vote in the last election and if they had voted against him it would have been an embarrassing loss to O. Instead they did not vote.. which was an actual vote for O.
Such children also cost us SCOTUS as O will get to appoint 2 to 4 justices to SCOTUS. The libs wanted that as much as they wanted O back in office. See my tag line.
Thanks neverdem.
Is The Shutdown Actually A Republican Victory? Op-Ed Suggests Radically Alternative Narrative
inquisitr.com | 10/15/13
Posted on Fri Oct 18 09:56:45 2013 by cotton1706
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3080525/posts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.