Skip to comments.The Numbers That Scare Senate Democrats
Posted on 02/08/2014 10:12:38 PM PST by neverdem
Voting with Obama 97% of the time is going to end some careers.
Three sets of numbers have emerged in recent weeks that bode ill for Democratic hopes to keep the U.S. Senate. The first came from new Federal Election Commission filings and news reports on campaign fundraising for the fourth quarter of 2013, and cash-on-hand on Dec. 31.
Seven states carried by Mitt Romney have Democratic senators whose seats are up in November. Overall in these states, the leading Republican candidates raised $6.5 million while their Democratic opponentsincluding four incumbentsraised $6.7 million during the last quarter. Five Republicans outraised their Democratic opponents, including in all three states (Montana, South Dakota and West Virginia) where the Democratic senators are leaving and in two of the four states (Alaska, Arkansas, Louisiana and North Carolina) where Democratic incumbents are trying to hold on.
Republicans also whittled away at the Democratic cash-on-hand advantage in these states. Democrats had an $18.5 million to $11.5 million cash advantage at the end of September. By the end of December, Democrats had roughly $21 million, Republicans $15.5 million.
The second troubling number for Democrats is Gallup's presidential job-approval rating, which was 42% the week ending last Sunday. The president's average approval in these seven Senate states is roughly 36%. If that's the case on Election Day, he will likely sink his party's candidates, who probably cannot run more than five points ahead of Mr. Obama's rating.
Then there is the nonpartisan Congressional Quarterly's summary of last year's legislative voting patterns. The four red state Democratic senators running for re-election gave Mr. Obama's policies almost perfect support, led by Louisiana's Mary Landrieu and Alaska's Mark Begich at 97%, followed by North Carolina's Kay Hagan at 96% and Arkansas's Mike Pryor at 90%...
(Excerpt) Read more at rove.com ...
Hey, that’s great, Karl!
Now President Romney will have a Republican Senate to work with!
No sweat. The stupid party will figure out how to piss it away.
Well, I am crossing my fingers and hoping its true (what OTHER choice do we have). The probability is, of course, that Republican senators in the majority wit out-RINO each other, thinking that that is their best path to the presidency.
No, just analysis, he's pretty good at that.
And Karl my boy, it’s even better than you describe because not only are we going to rout the RATs, we’re going to “off” some of the RINOs as well.
Hagan gonna lose! Hagan gonna lose! I CAN’T WAIT.
Lmao. For a sec I thought the 97% was Republicans.
I am starting to get worried if Karl Rove, a known loser, says we are going to win.
Now we’ll just have to wait, IF the GOP is going to take over the Senate, that they will undo the crap Obama has created or if they will just act as if nothing has happened and try to reach across the aisle so as not to piss off the MSM.
Hes trying to assure the big donors that the Party doesnt need the help of the Tea Party groups. They forget how he threw away some $300 million in 2012 and convinced his candidate to go easy on the President.
You are brave to post something Rove wrote here given the extreme level of disdain in which he’s held. I think some freepers practically like Harry Reid better than Rove.
If McConnell wins re-election, he will do this just to throw mud in the face of the more militant conservatives.
This is like listening to the advise of Jerry Jones about how to build a winning football team.
Forget all the other numbers, they’re irrelevant.
ObamaCare, and all its unintended consequences, is single-handedly killing the Democrats right now, and will continue to do so until November - and there’s no way Big Media can cover that fact.
Once Congress is fully back in Republican hands, Obama is in a box. With at least a few competents in the House and Senate (Cruz, Rand, etc.), the real fun begins.
Republicans can easily lose their vacant seat in Georgia, where Sam Nunn’s daughter will be the Democrat nominee.
Contrary to what Rove hopes for, Republicans have no chance at all in New Mexico, Oregon, and Iowa.
New Mexico is 50% Hispanic, and a majority of whites in both Oregon and Iowa voted for Obama.
If the GOP does win in Michigan, New Hampshire, and Minnesota, I think we are guaranteed 3 more RINO senators.
My 2014 prediction.....
We gain 2 seats in the Senate.
We lose a few House seats, almost certainly in Georgia and Texas, and we hold on to our completely useless majority.
I think the 7 million new people on Medicaid might disagree with you.
I don’t think the “non-white” voting base will be nearly as motivated to vote in 2014 as they were when Obama was on the ballot. A funny thing is happening in NC. Despite the propaganda and weekly protests by the Democrats since Governor McCrory and the Republican majority enacted their pro-growth tax policies, the unemployment rate is down and the job market is improving every day. Hagan is very unpopular in the state and her case will not be helped by ads showing her parroting Obama, “If you like your plan, you can keep it.”
It was the Democrats who emphasized the ‘absolute importance’ of Healthcare.
Now that they’ve ruined it- It’s coming back to bite them.
When was the last time Rove was right?
RATS are pimping her as something she isn't.
“My 2014 prediction ....
We lose a few House seats, almost certainly in Georgia and Texas”
SIGNING "THE BIG EFFIN' DEAL"---NOW KNOWN AS "THE BIG EFFIN' DEBACLE."
"Those Democrats leering over my shoulder owe me bigtime.
The healthcare bill insures we get a permanent Democratic majority."
" All except those Tea Party types, swallowed hook, line and sinker my promises that they could:
(1) keep their existing health plans,
(2) keep their own doctors that they like,
(3) keep their 25-year-olds on the family health plan,
(4) never be denied coverage for a pre-existing condition,
(5) sign up instantly on my tech-savvy government Web site,
(6) buy insurance only after becoming seriously ill."
(7) save $2,500 in annual premiums in the bargain....
(8) All without any new taxes."
"Them sonovagun Tea Partiers will rue the day they criticized my wonderful bill."
As far back as 2008, at the presidential debate in Nashville, Democrat candidate Obama advanced his signature healthcare plan---ultimately enacted, by an historic straight Democrat party-line vote, into the "Affordable Care Act"
QUOTING 2008 OBAMA: "No. 1, let me just repeat, if youve got a health care plan that you like, you can keep it. All Im going to do is help you to lower the premiums on it. Youll still have choice of doctor. Repeated over and over ---- with the promise that every American family would be saving $2500.00 on healthcare costs.
Significantly, Obamba NEVER corrected lock-stepping Democrats, all reading from the same Democrat talking points, all of them repeating the same Democrat promises---over and over again.
LOCK-STEPPING PARTY LOYALTY NOT SEEN SINCE 1930-40's ERA EUROPE Obama And The Dems marched in lockstep. The persistent Dumbocrat drumbeat ---- in obeisance to Obama ---- kept ringing reassuringly in our ears: "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan."
I have no problem with Obama being a millstone around any Democrat’s neck.
Too bad it’s Rove predicting this, as ordinarily that would be the kiss of death. Still, even a blind pig finds an acorn every once in a while.
Watch what happens when people come to realize what Obbamacare is and then come to know that every democrat in the Senate and the House, and the president himself voted for it. That’s 100% of the democrats voted to pass it.
Keep in mind that Rove works the “center”. That is the niche that he has carved out for himself, and anything that threatens the role of the so-called moderate is a threat to his livelihood. He opposes the things that we advocate, not necessarily because he thinks we are wrong (I’m sure he does on some things), but he fears that we might “alienate” his stock in trade “center/moderates”.
I've written extensively on this subject in previous months.
Please note I have made my 2014 predictions based on the theory that Democrats will be very successful at turning out their core constituency of non-whites and poor white women.
By the way, the Democrats began to implement their 2014 turn out strategy in Texas and Georgia just weeks after the 2012 election.
I have also made my prediction on the fact that the GOP leadership will continue to publicly assault and demoralize Conservative voters, which will suppress Conservative turn out in 2014 even more than it was suppressed in 2012.
In Georgia, 31% of the population is Black.
In 2012, even with a Black presidential candidate, just 13% of voters were Black.
That will change in 2014, no matter what you think you know about voting in Georgia.
The most vulnerable candidate I see is Jack Kingston in House District 1.
Kingston's District covers 17 counties.
In 16 of those counties, Kingston's majority exceeded the total number of white voters.
That means HUGE numbers of Black voters did not go to the polls in those counties.
That will not happen in 2014.
In Chatham County, the largest county in Kingston's district, 50% of the residents are non-white.
Kingston will not win Chatham if Blacks turn out.
If poor white women turn out, Kingston will lose Chatham by a substantial margin.
Glynn County is the second largest county in that District.
36% of residents are non-white, and many whites are lower middle class.
I predict Kingston will lose Glynn County, too.
I will have to refresh my memory on county names and exact numbers.
But one fact definitely stands out:
40% of Texans are Hispanic.
In 2012, just 10% of voters were Hispanic.
Texas Hispanics are NOT Conservatives.
They vote 70% for the Democrat Party.
**Full Disclosure - the 40% number is misleading - it includes Green Cards and Illegals.
I will get back to you on my 2 seat loss in Texas.
And I still predict that Sam Nunn’s daughter will win.
“In Georgia, 31% of the population is Black.
In 2012, even with a Black presidential candidate, just 13% of voters were Black.”
It is unlikely that blacks will be a higher percentage of the GA electorate in 2014 than in 2012. But let’s say that you’re right: there just aren’t enough blacks in GA-01 or any of the other GOP-held CDs to make up for their strong Republican lean. Even GA-01, which I agree is the least Republican GOP-held CD in the state (BTW, you don’t even seem to know that Kingston is running for the Senate, so the seat is open), gave Romney a 56%-43% victory over Obama. And unlike the Senate seat, Democrats aren’t even contesting the GA-01: no Democrat candidate has reported raising *any* money (and all are nobodies), while 5 Republicans reported having raised between $100,000 and $550,000 as of December 31.
Your theiry that GOP House seats in GA are in peril of falling to the RATs is not based on reality.
And your numbers in Texas are just as wrong as those in GA. You were almost correctvregarding the Hispanic percentage of the population (it’s 38%), but the lercentage of Hispanics among voters in TX in 2012 was 21%, not 10%. And the lowest Romney percentage in a GOP-held CD in TX was 57% in TX-32. Moreover, the RATs aren’t contesting any TX House districts held by the GOP. So, again, all you’ve got going for you is defeatism and pessimism, with no facts to back you up.
Hey. The electorate is really, really smart.
They know that Progressives love them and that
the Tea Party is full of racists, bigots, and people who don’t care about them. So, naturally, the only choice is Progressive.
See? Ya know? Hmmmm?
They are state polls, not national polls.
I am trying to verify with additional sources, but no luck at the moment.
I used to have three links to state exit polls for 2012 - CNN, NBC, and Fox - and all of them used the National Election Pool, which is usually accepted as most accurate.
CNN and Fox have blacked out those state links, so I can't check there.
Pew Research and PBS have excellent state polling on toss up states, but no polls on Texas or Georgia, so I can't check there, either.
I will keep trying.
If you have a link for your numbers, please send it.
Several numbers caught my eye in your response.
The 65% white vote in Georgia is the same I have.
But, only 55% of Georgia residents are non-Hispanic white.
So, if Black turn out exceeded white turn out, as you say, then Black turn out must have been in the range of 36% of the total vote, or higher.
That puts Black + white voters above 100%, BEFORE we count Hispanics and Asians and Mixed Race.
Finally - Texas was 38.2% Hispanic in 2012.
Since Hispanics are the fastest growing demographic in Texas, I rounded up to 40% for the 2014 election.
Sorry for not making that clear.
Once again, your link would be helpful, if you are using one.
Well, if the numbers you got were by state, you are confusing GA and TX with two other states, because you are way off.
In GA, black turnout was as high if not higher than white turnout: http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/08/18131900-a-census-first-black-voter-turnout-passes-whites?lite Whites (I assume that they meant non- Hispanic whites) were 65% of voters
Romney carried GA whites by 76%-23% over Obama, with whites (presumably non-Hispanic) constituting 65% of Georgians casting votes. http://www.amren.com/features/2012/11/race-and-the-2012-election/ Given that fact, how could you explain blacks being less than 30% of voters in the election? You can’t, since Romney didn’t get over 60% statewide (which he would have if blacks were only 13% of voters), and since Hispanics plus Asians plus Native Americans were liess than 4% of voters in GA (see below).
As for the fact that white Anglos are only 55% of GA’s total population but cast 65% of votes, that isn’t due to some huge overperformance: the number we need to look at is percentage of the 18+ citizen population, since kids and non-citizens can’t vote. Hispanics are 9% of the total population in GA, but are only 3% of eligible voters and less than 2% of registered voters. http://www.pewhispanic.org/2012/10/01/latinos-in-the-2012-election-georgia/ Those data from just prior to the 2012 elections show white Anglos as 59% of registered voters and blacks as 30% of registered voters, with Hispanics as 1.8% and Asians 1.4%!of registered voters, but with 8% as “two or more races” and other categories. Given the turnout numbers (with blacks having perhaps higher turniut than whites in GA—they certainly did in the South as a whole), I may have been lowballing black turnout by putting it at 231% to 32%, at least if we include persons of two of more races as black when one of the races is black (which is usually the case).
So your numbers are way, way off, and Inguarantee you that you didn’t read anywhere that blacks were 13% of the GA electorate in 2012. And blacks don’t have much room to grow as a percentage of the GA electorate in 2014, much less in the GOP-held CDs (blacks were packed into four black-majority, overwhelmingly Dem CDs).
Karl, pushing his bona fides up hill. He’s like Sisyphus, but his task is to convince conservatives he’s trustworthy.
Here's the link:
I clicked on “Georgia,” and this is the poll that pops up.
Obviously, it's a national poll, but since I was just looking for Black voter data, I didn't notice.
So, yeah, I goofed.
I used the Fox News exit data for 2 years, but they shut that down about a month ago.
In spite of my “pessimism,” we are on the same side.
I campaigned door-to-door for AuH2O in 1964 and hung a 6'X 6’ outdoor portrait of Goldwater on my Rec Room wall for 30 years.
My primary issues today are Immigration and the center-left leadership of the GOP.
When Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and poor white women turn out to vote at the same rate white Conservatives vote, the Democrats will take permanent control of the federal government.
By the way, two of the links you posted are in my archive, so we do search for data in the same places.
“When Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and poor white women turn out to vote at the same rate white Conservatives vote, the Democrats will take permanent control of the federal government.”
Had Republicans been told in 1964 or 1968 that Texas would be 38% Hispanic in 2012, what do you think would be their over/under on the percentage of the vote that GOP presidential, gubernatorial and Senate candidates would get?
BTW, poor white women vote Republican so long as they’re married. It is single women, whether rich or poor, that give the RATs big margins.
Asians and Hispanics will not vote 70-30 for Democrats unless we demonize them. And while the black vote is a tougher nut to crack, we can start making inroads by electing black conservatives to office, given that the psychological barrier (”I don’t know any black Republicans”)is the biggest impediment to getting 25% of the black vote; and once we get 25% of the black vote, the Democrat Party as we know it will be dead.
We are a party of ideas, and must remain true to our philosophy. If we become a party of certain demographic groups, your pessimistic prediction will become a self-fulfilling prophesy. If you could go door-to-door for Goldwater-Miller in 1964 in spite of their seemingly insurmountable odds of victory, you can stop saying that districts that gave Romney 56% while Obama was getting historic black turnout will vote for some unknown Democrat for Congress in 2014.
BTW, I always assumed that we were on the same side regarding what sort of society and government we want, but I can’t countenance defeatism, particularly when it is born of the assumption that only those demographic groups who have supported the GOP of late will vote for us in the future (and most especially when the demographic data used is faulty). There are three things that will guarantee our defeat, and we need to be vigilant against any of the three infecting conservatives and Republicans: (i) apathy, (ii) the notion that we need to support liberal policies in order to win, and (iii) making the perfect the enemy of the good.
I’m not a defeatist, H2O.
I’m a Cassandra.