Posted on 01/07/2014 12:56:00 PM PST by SeekAndFind
This should be a huge midterm election for Republicans, especially for the Senate, where they need six seats to seize control of the upper chamber and send Harry Reid back to the business end of his filibuster reform. After all, it just took a little overreach and arrogance for Barack Obama and the Democrats to end up in the 2010 shredder, losing the House in the first midterms for Obama. After lying for five years with the “you can keep your plan” promise and the skyrocketing costs for health insurance set to hammer the middle class, 2014 should make 2010 look like a picnic … right? Larry Sabato thinks so, assuming Republicans don’t blow the opportunity:
I’d argue that three factors are paramount: the president, the economy and the election playing field. And, at least preliminarily, those three factors seem to be pointing toward Republican gains in both houses in the 2014 midterms.
Why?
1. The president. His job approval numbers are perhaps the best indicator of the public’s overall political orientation at any given time, a kind of summary statistic that takes everything at the national level into account. In a large majority of cases, the president’s party does poorly in midterms, especially the second midterm of a two-term administration. …
As 2014 begins, the environment for the Democrats in this election year is not good. The botched, chaotic rollout of the Affordable Care Act is the obvious cause, but it is broader than that: the typical sixth-year unease that produces a “send-them-a-message” election. Fortunately for Democrats, the GOP-initiated shutdown of the federal government in October has tempered the public’s desire for a shift to the Republican side, too. “None of the above” might win a few races in November if voters had the choice.
As long as Republicans keep the focus on ObamaCare, the incompetence of its administration, and the falsehoods used to sell it, they should do well against Democrats forced to defend it. Sabato notes that “this year’s Senate slate strongly favors the Republicans,” and that will remain true as long as Republicans keep aiming at Democrats.
Unfortunately, we’re seeing a lot of effort at aiming at Republicans, especially in what would be otherwise safe Senate seats. In my column today for The Week, I point out the stakes involved in this midterm election and agree with Gov. Scott Walker that we risk disaster by redirecting our aim internally rather than externally:
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker sees the same danger. In an interview with CNN’s Candy Crowley, the potential presidential contender warned activists that, while their energy and frustration are appreciated, their target selection is way off. Those unhappy with budget compromises need to aim at Senate Democrats rather than sitting Republicans, Walker explained, so that Republicans gain rather than lose leverage. “[G]o to Louisiana or go to Arkansas or go to North Carolina or Alaska, where there are senators facing real elections as Democrats,” Walker advised, “and go and help in those elections and elect new Republicans to come because a year from now, things will be much different if Republicans hold the United States Senate.”
That’s good advice. Thanks to Harry Reid’s dismantling of the filibuster, just standing pat in the Senate for the final two years of Obama’s presidency won’t be enough for Republicans. The GOP needs the majority to force Obama into compromises on appointments as well as to control the floor agenda on legislation. That will still put Republicans in opposition to Obama, but they can set the table themselves in Congress and force Obama to deal with them directly, rather than have Reid running interference. The GOP will also need to take as many Senate seats in 2014, because the 2016 class of the Senate will be tougher on Republicans.
This isn’t to say that the grassroots activists have no legitimate reasons for their anger with Republican leadership on Capitol Hill, or to suggest that primary challenges are a bad practice. In 2014, though, the opportunity to finally sideline Reid and take command of Capitol Hill is too good to pass up. This last chance to use both chambers of Congress to slow down the Obama administration should have the Tea Party pointing their rhetorical and activist guns outward rather than inward.
In this case, we’re better off getting Republicans elected rather than spending this election in a purification effort. Right now, the majority has got to be the priority.
3 years ago I bought Sabado's book that was all about his proposals on how to ammend the US Constitution. I knew he was a dimbulb asshat, but it was $3 at Big Lots and figured I would be "open minded"...
Nope.
When I saw how he TOTALLY missed the intent of 17A, and wanted to modify it by making it not only popular Senatorial voting, but increase the number of senators to be like the US House... I had enough, and heaved the book across the room at the wall of my bedroom right into the garbage can.
I am pissed off to this day that I wasted that $3.
If voter fraud is why Dems win then how come they didn't do it in 2010, or the 2012 recall election of Walker in WI? Or in MA with Scott Brown 2010?
Walker won that 2012 recall election yet months later 2012 Romney loses the same state WI.
exactly.
Why is the majority the priority? We have a majority in the House who jump whenever Obama asks. Yes, the R’s are driving a bit more slowly than the D’s but their direction is essentially the same, over the cliff.
If the Republicans and conservatives don’t seize the day in 2014 they likely will never do it again. The political stars and planets will never be in better alignment. And if they don’t succeed it may not be their fault, although it could be. It may be that the electorate is sufficiently dumbed-down and entitlement-addicted and ripe for big daddy socialism that they will give the Obamanation and the Demonrats yet another pass rather than risk interrupting the flow of what, to them, have become necessities.
RE: I believe Sabato lives in Northern Virginia and drinks the foul water there that is drawn from the Beltway sewage system. Hence, he is brain damaged with ruling class dementia.
Let’s look at his track record...
From Wikipedia:
Prior to the 2002 midterm elections, where the Republican Party saw gains in both branches of Congress, Sabato’s Crystal Ball website accurately predicted the outcome in 433 of the 435 contests for the House of Representatives and 32 of 34 Senate races.
In 2004, which saw Republicans retain the White House and gain seats in the House and Senate, Crystal Ball correctly predicted the outcome of 525 of the 530 political races (99% accuracy), missing only one House race, one Senate race, one governor’s race and two states in the Electoral College.
In August 2006, Crystal Ball predicted that the Democrats would gain 29 seats in the House of Representatives and 6 seats in the Senate, providing them with a majority in both chambers. Sabato’s predictions proved correct: each of his 33 Senate predictions were accurate, and in the House, Democrats gained 29 seats on election night, the precise total predicted by the Crystal Ball (Democrats would go on to pick up a 30th seat in the December 12, 2006 run-off in Texas’ 23rd district).
In 2006 Sabato was named the most accurate prognosticator by MSNBC, CNBC, and Pew’s Project for Excellence in Journalism. In 2006, Sabato was the only national analyst who correctly predicted the exact Democratic gains in Senate and House contests.
In July 2008, Crystal Ball correctly projected that Barack Obama would win the presidency in a near-landslide.
Sabato predicted a 364-174 margin in the Electoral College, as well as the popular vote percentages.
The prediction was merely one point off the mark, with the actual result on November 4, 2008 being Obama 365 and McCain 173. (It did not predict an Obama win in Nebraska’s 2nd congressional district.) Crystal Ball also accurately predicted 100% of all 35 Senate races, and 11 gubernatorial races correctly.
In November 2010, Crystal Ball projected that Republicans would pick up 55 seats in the House of Representatives.
The Republicans picked up 63 House seats. It predicted a pickup of 8 seats in the Senate for Republicans. The Republicans picked up 6 Senate seats.
In 2012, Crystal Ball projected that Obama would win the presidency with 290 electoral votes to 248 for Romney; there would be no change in partisan makeup of the Senate, with Democrats at 53 and Republicans at 47; and Democrats would pick up 3 seats in the House of Representatives, for a result of 239 Republicans and 196 Democrats.
The projection was similar to the actual results, but Crystal Ball under-estimated Obama’s number of electoral votes (332) and under-estimated Democratic victories in both the Senate (Democrats picked up two seats) and in the House (Democrats picked up eight seats).
So, say what you want about him, but Sabato’s Crystal Ball is pretty impressive ( compared to say, Karl Rove, Dick Morris or Gallup ).
Same here. I am 62 and fed up with the Bob Michaels, Bob Doles, John Boehners and John McCains. I want more Mike Lee’s, Trey Gowdy’s and Ted Cruz and I would prefer more of them than a useless majority afraid of Obama and the MSM
The Demonrats didn’t win because they couldn’t steal enough votes.
Yeah, but so what?
Well, there you go. Proves once again that only moderates can win. (/sarcasm)
You are reading/copying from from wikipedia and giving undue credit to Sabato when he is just one of many forecasters who benefit from the well-known incumbency reelection rate. More on that below.
Behind Sabato’s Crystal Ball is Professor Alan Abramowitz who is a senior columnist for CB. Alan uses statistical models using simple multiple regression methods that can be performed with statistical software with a dataset and a few clicks on a computer. But he was way off on the prediction of 2012 where he forecast that the election would be closer than the 2008 election and possibly as close as the 2000 election.
So Sabato is using the well-known tenured faculty trick of lapping up credit of colleagues where there is success and becoming MIA when there is failure.
It is not difficult to get a high percentage prediction on congressional races given the well-known predictors of incumbency. It’s not surprising. Several other forecasters have similar track records.
Sabato seems well-versed and a good writer, his appearance on TV show him to be meek-mannered and erudite.
But he lives close to the Beltway and he knows that is both a plus and a minus because he said so himself.
I grew up inside the Beltway and later just outside it. I know the culture. The people there are insulated. Nearly everybody there is a government employee, a government contractor or derive their living from these employees and contractors. If Ted Cruz wants to defund Obamacare and only Obamacare, the DC class will exaggerate that he’s trying to burn the whole place down. They become hysterical; that’s how they are.
Sabato is prone to hysterical views of DC ruling class members. In the article just quoted he not using Abramowitz’ regression results, he is merely calling ‘uncertainty’ to the GOP prospects of taking over the Senate because of challenges to otherwise safe seats, e.g. Cochran of Mississippi.
But Sabato’s ‘uncertainty’ is not found on analysis of anything other than a hysterical mood of ruling class pundits. Simple logic, anything that risks a safe seat creates uncertainty.
To conservatives at this junction, ‘uncertainty’ for GOPe moderates is very good indeed. We need more of it, much more of it. We need to close in on the comfort zone of the ruling class to the point they suffer sleepless nights because it will force DC to rethink and accept the views that are outside DC.
I have a PhD in Statistics from a university in the top 3 of that my field. My committee chair was a former chair of the University of Chicago and was a longtime colleague and close friend of Milton Friedman.
I am not impressed with political science prognosticators not because they are so often wrong; they are not! But because they find safe ground in the success rates if incumbents and then tinker with less variables which although statistically significant are not anywhere near as predictive as incumbency.
Alan added a new “polarization” variable to his model last election and it sucked. But it would have smelled to high heavens if he did not already include a few other highly statistically significant variables in the regression equation.
I’ll standby the statement that Sabato is picking up ruling class dementia when it comes to going with the Beltway crowd on ‘uncertainty’ and ‘concern’ over Tea Party challenges to incumbents in safe seats.
Sabato and Alan will need to come up with a Tea Party variable to tune their models with.
What many fail to see is that we no longer have fair elections. The Rats have so corrupted the system and get to count the votes in enough precincts that they can always call in whichever number of votes they need.
A majority must be the priority because of the Supreme Court.
If the Democrats hold 50 seats in the Senate until January of 2016, Obama may be able to appoint a couple of Supreme Court Justices without even facing a speed bump.
I get my first ever chance to vote for Susan Collins this year. Ah...no way. Gonna pass. She’s done nothing to show she deserves this conservative’s vote.
/johnny
/johnny
In this case, we’re better off getting Republicans elected rather than spending this election in a purification effort.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Bullcrap! We’ve done that for decades and we’ve gotten screwed and tattooed for decades. I’ve NEVER been one to “send a message”. But, it’s time to send a message.
See Posts #22 and #38 please.
If you want a majority, run conservative candidates. Because liberal Republicans aren’t going to win.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Yes they will; in some states. If Cornyn gets the GOP nomination, he will retain his Senate seat. Texas will never elect a Democrat. I’m hoping that Linda Vega, Steve Stockman and Mr. Stovall force a run-off. What would really be great would be for the run-off to be between Vega and Stovall and Cornhole be a lame duck the first week of March 2014.
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.