Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Morning Fix: The Palin index

1. Former Alaska governor Sarah Palin's "Going Rogue" didn't come with an index -- a no-no in political Washington -- but thanks to the Post's Paul "PV" Volpe, we bring you an (abbreviated) index of the bold-faced names mentioned by the 2008 vice presidential nominee in her memoir. (We left out the much publicized comments on Katie Couric, Nicolle Wallace and Steve Schmidt since unless you aren't paying attention you already know about them. Bono/Beatty, Warren: "Interested folks with good intentions who wanted to share ideas and insights, and I was happy to hear from them." Clinton, Bill: Palin says she sensed in her meetings with Clinton "an unspoken mutual disappointment with the media's serial unfairness to some presidential candidates in the 2008 race." Clinton, Hillary: Palin says her "hat is off" to the former first lady's performance on the campaign trail. Gibson, Charlie: Alaskans "seemed not to recognize" the ABC News anchor when he traveled to the Last Frontier to interview Palin. Hasselbeck, Elizabeth: Palin refers to the conservative voice on "The VIew" as "bold and talented." Lieberman, Joe: The Connecticut senator is described as a "bright spot" in the campaign, telling her not to "let these people try to change you." Salter, Mark: "One of the few people who could change [John McCain's] mind." Warren, Rick: Palin spoke with (and prayed with) the renowned pastor over the phone while taking a shower. (Not kidding.) Wright, Rev. Jeremiah: Palin wanted to raise the issue of Obama's ties to Wright more often and more forcefully -- "I will forever question the campaign for prohibiting discussion of such associations."

2. Palin is using the attention surrounding her book to ramp up her political action committee named, appropriately enough, SarahPAC. In her first e-mail solicitation for the PAC, which was sent to supporters Monday, Palin urges her backers to join her "on the road ahead"; "We'll help candidates (regardless of party) who have the courage to go to Washington or serve statewide and make the tough decisions needed to get our country back on track," she added. To date, SarahPAC has done little in the way of supporting candidates. For the first six months of the year, the PAC raised $733,000 but made just two donations to candidates -- $5,000 each to Sens. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and John McCain (Ariz.). That Palin seems to be committed to growing her PAC and building up political chits via contributions to up and coming candidates give her the look -- for the first time? -- of someone who is serious about running for president in 2012. (ABC's Teddy Davis believes he has found evidence that Palin is planning a presidential run buried deep in the pages of "Going Rogue.")

3. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) is making his candidate preferences known in two Republican primaries -- hosting a fundraiser in New York City on Dec. 7 to benefit former New Hampshire attorney general Kelly Ayotte and Kentucky Secretary of State Trey Grayson, according to a copy of the invite obtained by the Fix. Ayotte will face at least two candidates in the GOP primary -- businessmen Ovide Lamontagne and Bill Binnie -- while Grayson is being challenged by Rand Paul, the son of Texas Rep. Ron Paul. The National Republican Senatorial Committee made news last week when it made clear it would not involve itself financially in contested primaries. But, McConnell's involvement for Grayson and Ayotte make clear where the "smart money" is in these primary fights.

4. Former Fix boss Charlie Cook wades into the "1994 versus 2010" debate with a column in Congress Daily that outlines the differences between the two elections. Cook's central points: 1) In 1993/1994 the Republican brand was in far better shape than it is today 2) There was no fight in 1994 for the heart and soul of conservatism as most Republicans simply wanted a way back to power no matter the candidates that got them there. 3) Democrats have not experienced near the number of retirements that the party did in the run-up to the 1994 election. That final point may well be the most crucial. History tells us that open seats are far more likely to switch parties but, so far, just seven House Democrats are retiring or running for higher office with just three of those seats -- Louisiana's 3rd district, New Hampshire's 2nd district and Pennsylvania's 7th district -- legitimate takeover opportunities for Republicans. Compare those numbers to 1994 when 40 of the 52 seats Democrats lost were in open seat races and you begin to see why the comparison between the two elections is somewhat ill-fitting. Watch to see how many more House Democrats decide to bail on a re-election race next November between now and January 2010; if that number stays below 15 or 20, Democrats have to feel good about holding the House in 2011.

5. Vice President Joe Biden will be in Connecticut on Dec. 11 to raise money for Sen. Chris Dodd (D) in what looks like an increasingly difficult re-election race next November. "The vice president and Senator Dodd worked hand-in-hand on so many issues throughout the years, and he knows first-hand how hard Chris has worked for the people back home in Connecticut," said Dodd campaign manager Jay Howser about the fundraiser, which will be held at the Connecticut Science Museum in Hartford. The announcement of the event comes just days after a new Quinnipiac poll showed Dodd's numbers flagging badly. It's not clear whether the White House will move at some point in the future to push Dodd aside -- if he was out of the race the seat would be an easy hold -- but Biden's presence in the state should reassure nervous Dodd allies. The state's filing deadline isn't until May 25, 2010, however, so Dodd has plenty of time to consider his options.

6. After months operating in the shadows, Organizing for America, the grassroots/campaign end of the Democratic National Committee, appears to be making a concerted effort to draw some press attention to its efforts. First came a piece by Talking Points Memo's Christina Bellantoni featuring a sitdown interview with OFA executive director Mitch Stewart and his deputy Jeremy Bird that credited the organization with having expanded the already-wide donor base built during Obama's 2008 presidential campaign among other accomplishments. Then, on Monday, came a piece on OFA by CQ-Roll Call's Keith Koffler that suggested its potential utility to Democratic candidates in 2010. "OFA operatives have developed relationships and detailed knowledge of the local pro-Obama landscape, right down to 'walk sheet' of the right doors to knock on to get out the Democratic vote," writes Koffler. The OFA media blitz comes just two weeks after Democrats suffered losses in Virginia and New Jersey and is almost certainly shaped by those defeats. Remember that something like OFA, which is technically a project of the DNC, has never been tried before and, like all new(ish) things, has to demonstrate its utility to party donors and activists.

7. Illinois state Treasurer Lexi Giannoulias continues to firm up his support among the party establishment for his Senate primary bid, winning the backing of Rep. Jan Schakowsky over the weekend. Schakowsky, who considered a run for the Senate in her own right earlier this year, praised Giannoulias's "courage to take on powerful interests and stand up for Illinois families." In addition to Schakowsky, Giannoulias now has the support of Illinois Reps. Luis Gutierrez, Phil Hare, Bill Foster and Mike Quigley while Chicago Urban League President Cheryle Jackson has the backing of Reps. Jesse Jackson Jr. , Bobby Rush and Danny Davis. (Former Chicago Inspector General David Hoffman has yet to win an endorsement from the congressional delegation.) Senate Majority Leader Dick Durbin, who encouraged Giannoulias to enter the race, is officially neutral in the primary. Giannoulias's establishment support could be a double-edged sword in this strongly anti-incumbent environment. On the positive side, it will help him to raise money and build the sort of turnout operation -- particularly in Chicago -- that he will need to win a low-turnout primary. On the other, party bosses lining up behind a candidate may not sit well with voters who have had a front-row seat to the political implosion of former governor Rod Blagojevich in recent years.

8. Pollster.com's Mark Blumenthal pens an important piece about the successes of automated-dialed polls in the 2009 elections. Blumenthal notes that auto-dialers were more accurate than traditional live caller polling in the New Jersey governor's race and were as accurate as the more traditional method in Virginia. His conclusion? "When it comes to predicting the outcome of an election, automated surveys are as accurate as those that use live interviewers." Blumenthal does -- helpfully -- note that auto-dialed are far thinner than a live call poll, yielding limited information beyond the head-to-head numbers of value. (Blumenthal also posted his interviews with the three biggest practitioners of automated survey at pollster.com -- it's well worth the read.)

9. Now we know what a scorned governor looks like. A few months after the White House dispatched its political director to encourage New York Gov. David Paterson (D) to step aside from his re-election bid for the good of the party, Paterson dropped the rhetorical hammer on the president's decision to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in the Empire State. "This is not a decision that I would have made," said Paterson. "I think terrorism isn't just attack, it's anxiety and I think you feel the anxiety and frustration of New Yorkers who took the bullet for the rest of the country." Regardless, it's hard to question the White House's political antennae; a new Siena Research Institute poll showed Paterson losing badly to former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

10. National Public Radio begins the debate we have been waiting a decade for: the 50 most influential/best albums of the Aughts. (Is that a thing? Did we ever settle on a name for this decade?) Among their -- and our -- best: "Funeral" by Arcade Fire, "For Emma, Forever Ago" by Bon Iver, "Grey Album" by Danger Mouse, "Our Endless Numbered Days" by Iron & Wine and "Yankee Hotel Foxtrot" by Wilco.

By Chris Cillizza  |  November 17, 2009; 5:14 AM ET
Categories:  Morning Fix  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Malek on Palin: "She's obviously touching a need"
Next: The discovery of John Thune

Comments

There's something seriously creepy about this whole common-people faux-populism that lies at the heart of the Palin movement. It says a lot about us, and it ain't good, that we deprecate experience and expertise as "elitism," that there is some great virtue in ignorance and gut-feel morality.

It's worth noting that those who feel the moral certainties of fundamentalism are not the most tolerant and forgiving people, far from it, and that real social progress -- emancipation, suffrage, for example -- has largely been driven by atheists, people whose morals were more personally developed and less handed down.

We don't elect truck drivers and plumbers to high office, the demands are too great for ordinary people, we elect the best and the brightest (one hopes).

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | November 18, 2009 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Hey reason,

I enjoyed the post, though you seem to have a grudge against Durbin. Unhappy constituent?

@drindl - One of my closest friends is a strong right winger and we've had many interesting arguments over the years. So, I'll hardly bother with a shot against Dick Durbin. My recollection is that you've taken more than a few at Lieberman.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | November 17, 2009 7:04 PM | Report abuse

It's the Noughties not the Aughts.

Posted by: jeffersonian1 | November 17, 2009 4:52 PM | Report abuse

Mitch McConnell just backed a sure loser in Kentucky. The insider bankroll won't be enough this time.

Posted by: millionea7 | November 17, 2009 4:10 PM | Report abuse

McConnel wants his hand picked lackey who will be a convenient pawn for whatever machinations he intends. Disgusting.

For the good of Kentucky and the country, let us hope Rand Paul prevails. Send him a donation to help make it happen.

Posted by: zf123 | November 17, 2009 3:42 PM | Report abuse

"Where I don't buy the Democratic spin is in blaming it all on Deeds. McDonnell ran a smart, effective campaign and Deeds ran an ineffective, one note campaign. So, it is possible that this is just a one shot. Or simply part of Virginia moving to being a competitive state."

McDonnell did a great job, I think Dems definitely give him credit even while correctly pointing out that Deeds sucked.

But for the Virginia GOP, McDonnell is *extremely* atypical. Very few other top party members even try to pretend that they are moderates. It has been veering further and further right for years now and is no longer the party of John Warner and Tom Davis. Maybe McDonnell can turn it all around, but I don't think his heart is in it. So I think his win in a year of historically low turnout, again, is less than it's cracked up to be.

And I would definitely take two votes in the U.S. House over the two governorships. All the major issues right now are before the Federal government, not the states. States are and will be crippled by deficits for the next several years and will be focused almost exclusively on drastic and hugely unpopular budget cuts and/or tax increases. It the GOP wants to handle that, I say "have fun, guys."

Posted by: nodebris | November 17, 2009 3:16 PM | Report abuse

"In Ill., Turbin Durbin is a coward."

hey blade, we were wrng about this 'reason' character. we thought he might be that rare intelligent rightwing being, but eventually they all show their true infantile colors.

Posted by: drindl | November 17, 2009 2:44 PM | Report abuse

I'm not sure about Cucinelli. McDonnell managed to outmaneuver the current Lt.Gov. and become an unopposed nominee. I'm not convinced that Cucinelli would be able to do the same to Bolling. That might set up an interesting rematch if Jody Wagner were the Democratic nominee.

I agree that demographics have played a bit role in Va. turning purple. McDonnell embraced NoVa whereas Deeds ran from the outside. Worked in the primary, not in the general. Turns out, he didn't gain anything downstate and hurt himself in NoVa.

Where I don't buy the Democratic spin is in blaming it all on Deeds. McDonnell ran a smart, effective campaign and Deeds ran an ineffective, one note campaign. So, it is possible that this is just a one shot. Or simply part of Virginia moving to being a competitive state.

Still, it seems to me that going from the wipeouts of 2006 (losing the Senate and the House) and 2008 (losing the presidency and the Democrats gaining 60 seats in the Senate) to winning the two biggest races of the night in 2009 is a comeback. It's taken the Tories in the UK 12 years to do that.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | November 17, 2009 2:32 PM | Report abuse

First & foremost, I'm glad to see McConnell putting his political weight behind Grayson & Ayotte. They are the best shots to keep NH & Kentucky Republican fairly easily. I think they both have the party establishment lining up behind them and will dismiss their primary challenges, go forward and win the GE. Good job McConnell. With him not being up for reelection, I hope he endorses and holds a fundraiser for Kirk of Ill. next. He should go hard for Kirk, Ayotte & of course Grayson.

In Ill., Turbin Durbin is a coward. His not taking sides in the Democratic primary proves it. He won't endorse Lexi for fear of being bashed by the black electorate, who has lined up behind Jackson. He won't endorse Jackson for fear of losing some establishment support. What a wuss is Durbin.

Biden is stumping for Dodd. Not surprising at all. Dodd is a Democratic legend and will be in this race, likely until the end. He may well win reelection. It will be interesting to see how all of this goes down. The Republican primary is going to be very entertaining from start to finish as well!

Posted by: reason5 | November 17, 2009 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Chris


In Illinois, Giannoulias goes by Alex, Alexi


I don't know how you got the other name.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | November 17, 2009 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Earth to Chris calling--Americans don't share your Palinphilia:

A new CBS poll finds that Americans overwhelmingly don't want Sarah Palin to run for president -- and furthermore, even conservatives don't want her in the race.

Respondents were asked: "Would you like Sarah Palin to run for president in 2012?"

The top-line numbers: Only 24% would like Palin to run, compared to 66% who don't want her to run. Broken down by party identification, among Republicans it's 44%-48%, with Democrats 9%-83%, and among independents 26%-62%.

And among self-identified conservatives, only 41% said yes, to 50% who said no. Palin's only bright spot was white evangelicals, who favored a run by a narrow margin of 48%-42%.

Posted by: drindl | November 17, 2009 1:01 PM | Report abuse

"A district that will be hard to hold. Redistricting in Va. could easily cost more than that."

Well, NY23 is getting redistricted anyway, probably in a manner that disperses rather than concentrates its conservative vote.

Regarding Virginia redistricting, what percentage of the electorate do you think was aware that redistricting was at stake in the election? It's going to hurt, but its hardly as though Virginians consciously decided that the GOP was the best party to manage redistricting.

Certainly one is a fool to deny reality, and there are lessons for Democrats in the Virginia defeat. But if your foe wins the race because your horse throws a shoe, it doesn't mean that his horse has suddenly become faster. There is very little in the demographics of Virginia, the state GOP platform, or the peculiarities of this particular race that should give long-term hope to the currently constituted VA GOP. If tradition holds, in 4 years they will be running Ken Cuccinelli for governor, and he's going to be very hard to present as a rational, pragmatic moderate.

Posted by: nodebris | November 17, 2009 1:01 PM | Report abuse

These people are beyond pathetic.

"n the House floor last night, Media Matters points out, Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ) made his case against holding trials for 9/11 suspects in New York City, directing a question to Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

"I saw the mayor of New York said today, 'We're tough. We can do it.' Well, Mayor, how are you going to feel when it's your daughter that's kidnapped at school by a terrorist?" Shadegg said."

Posted by: drindl | November 17, 2009 12:58 PM | Report abuse

Rightwing guvs do damage mostly to their own states. House members can wreak more nationally.

Posted by: drindl | November 17, 2009 12:51 PM | Report abuse

dbitt:

You don't have to believe me.

"Major Retailers Reportedly Sell Palin's Book BELOW Cost"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7030429

Posted by: JakeD | November 17, 2009 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Interesting point on Va. turnout. One has to note that is an indication of Deeds' failure to motivate the Dem. base. I suspect that if one multiplied the numbers together, you'd find steady or possilby even increased turnout amongst Republicans. That's not inconsistent with the resurgent theme.

When one has taken an election in the teeth, it's best to consider that reality rather than deny it.

NY23 is one race. A district that will be hard to hold. Redistricting in Va. could easily cost more than that. If given the choice on the importance of one House seat or two governors, I'd bet on the guvs.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | November 17, 2009 12:21 PM | Report abuse

why do wingnuts
format their comments
as free verse?

Posted by: nodebris | November 17, 2009 12:19 PM | Report abuse

Chris is afraid of Sarah Palin,
she has bigger balls then he has,
oh wait, chris has no balls.

Posted by: simonsays1 | November 17, 2009 12:12 PM | Report abuse

I agree,
I dont believe in a God,
but surely Sarah Palin
is the Devil!!!

I will be the corner,
in my fetal position,
hoping my life is aborted
before I have to see Sarah Palin
in the Big Bored Out Oval Office!

Posted by: simonsays1 | November 17, 2009 12:10 PM | Report abuse

"I’m intrigued by #8. Might it be that auto-dialer polls are accurate in off-year elections (and maybe primaries, too) because they successfully connect with the kind of people who are likely to vote in off-year and primary elections? I’m thinking that land-line owning, home-when-you-call type people are generally older, more affluent, whiter and perhaps more civically conscientious – which is pretty much the profile of people likely to vote in off-year and primary elections.
Just a thought.

Posted by: margaretmeyers "

Also, I think a machine might select for a more politically motivated group. A person can sort of talk you into answering the poll when you might not have done so with a machine. This means machines select people with a stronger predilection for expressing an opinion and more likely to go vote.

Posted by: DDAWD | November 17, 2009 11:54 AM | Report abuse

No margaret, it isn't how it's supposed to work. But that's because we are dealing with a radical anti-goverment cult rather than a political party.

mjj -- immaturity is the main theme of their main theme --failure to take respnsiblity for actions, pointing fingers at everyone else, passing the buck, whining and tantrums. in short, infantilism.

they love palin precisely because they think it p*sses democrats off . that's the most mature motivation they've got -- a thumb in your eye.

Posted by: drindl | November 17, 2009 11:54 AM | Report abuse

So, I'm waiting go Sarah to release a Christmas album next. I bet it will sell very well on Amazon.

Posted by: nodebris | November 17, 2009 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Re: Deeds/McDonnell, again: evenly split electorate, lowest turnout in forty years, candidates both running in the middle and downplaying party differences, and a huge disparity in enthusiasm among the candidates' base voters. I think for most Virginians, the race was "eh, whatever." Hardly "Resurgence" material.

McDonnell himself declared that he did not see his election as a referendum.

Posted by: nodebris | November 17, 2009 11:45 AM | Report abuse

Just read the drivel in this book and you will realize that the "best seller list" no doubt has more to do with political support than it does with quality of the book. The book seems to have a very immature theme. Her attempt to off-load her part of the responsibility about the loss of the McCain Palin ticket is not pretty. But this is in keeping with her usual operational procedure. It is obvious that she is incapable of introspection to the degree that it would allow for some self correction. In the end though, McCain is responsible for his choice and having chosen her, his campaign staff could have done better in shielding Palin. That is, if she had been smart enough to benefit from good directions. I shudder at the thought of my party settling for a woman who assumes the Alaska governor can see Russia from her window and even talks like that is a plus.

Posted by: mJJ2 | November 17, 2009 11:37 AM | Report abuse

I just dont get it. You Republicans have legitimate candidates. some pretty good ones. Lindsay Graham, Mike Huckabee, and Kay Bailey Hutchinson, are all serious leaders who have a solid grasp of reality and issues. none of them will ever have my vote, but few republicans would. But instead of choosing a real statesman or woman, you throw all of your weight behind this cartoonish reality show star, who has no handle on the issues. She has no understanding of the likely results of her choices should she win. She has no ability to represent our country with anything but spite and buffoonery to the rest of the world. Of all of the qualified republicans you could support, why her?

Posted by: elijah24 | November 17, 2009 11:31 AM | Report abuse


Is Newsweek's cover of Sarah Palin 'sexist'?


http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=6498


.

Posted by: usadblake | November 17, 2009 11:29 AM | Report abuse

Dear Mr. Cillizza:

I am afraid there is a mistake in your post (point 4):

"Compare those numbers to 1994 when 40 of the 52 seats Democrats lost were in open seat races and you begin to see why the comparison between the two elections is somewhat ill-fitting."

Actually, according to Wikipedia, only 22 of the 52 seats Democrats lost were in open seat races, and as far as I have counted there were, in total, 31 open Democratic seats.

The majority of Democratic losses on 1994 were suffered by incumbents.

That is not to say that as of today, the retirement landscape is not better for Democrats than it was in 1994 (only 6 genuine Democratic retirements, since Mr. Wexler from Florida will actually resign and provoke a special election in his district), but a) things can change in the next months, and b) if 2010 is a bad year, incumbents will suffer.

I agree though, that the less Democratic open seats, the lesser Republican chances are to overtake the House.

I do not know how good your Spanish is, but you can read more about American politics (in case you don't have enough at your present job!) at my blog:

http://labatallaporlacasablanca.blogspot.com/

Posted by: pedrosorianomendiara | November 17, 2009 11:19 AM | Report abuse

bsimon and AndyR3, I feel like these retirements (and the ones this past couple of years) on the Republican side are driven by 1) the prospect of GOP wilderness years and 2) this purge the GOP is experiencing and 3) the divide between parties on the Hill, and the fact that everything must go to the mat. This combination sucks the pleasure out of being on the Hill: all you can see befor you is endless fund-rasing, insulting purity tests from non-constituents and unproductive floor fights.

That isn't the way any of this is supposed to work.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | November 17, 2009 11:07 AM | Report abuse

Just read the drivel in this book and you will realize that the "best seller list" no doubt has more to do with political support than it does with quality of the book. The book seems to have a very immature theme. Her attempt to off-load her part of the responsibility about the loss of the McCain Palin ticket is not pretty. But this is in keeping with her usual operational procedure. It is obvious that she is incapable of introspection to the degree that it would allow for some self correction. In the end though, McCain is responsible for his choice and having chosen her, his campaign staff could have done better in shielding Palin. That is, if she had been smart enough to benefit from good directions. I shudder at the thought of my party settling for a woman who assumes the Alaska governor can see Russia from her window and even talks like that is a plus.

Posted by: mJJ2 | November 17, 2009 10:59 AM | Report abuse

Deeds came within a few hundred votes of knocking off McDonnell in a statewide race 4 years ago. Kaine won in a squeaker, so that wasn't a matter of coat tails. He did win the primary handily. He also has won election to the state senate many times, so the caricature of him as an inarticulate bumbler may be comforting, but inaccurate. It was also a nearly 20 point win. Further, the other two statewide races were won by similar margins. Personally, I hope to see Jody Wagner run for statewide office again. In the AttyGen race, Cucinelli did not make any effort to disguise his cultural conservative roots.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | November 17, 2009 10:59 AM | Report abuse

Huckleberry pontificates... doom for democrats. Get a grip, mikey, .See, it's actually obama who will be on trial, here, you know, because he's the terrorist--that's the subtext, isn't it? Too bad the media pays so much attention to this Last Days fruitcake.

"Failed Republican presidential contender Mike Huckabee told an Orlando radio station yesterday that the decision to hold trials for 9/11 suspects in New York spells doom for the Obama administration.

"I would tell you not only is the Obama administration finished, I think the Democratic Party is finished," Huckabee told WDBO.

"Well, I think it's absurd, and I think the Obama administration will be as much on trail as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed," he said, referring to the self-proclaimed mastermind of 9/11, who will be tried in New York City. "

'On trail' -- this is about the 4th time I've seen this referred to this way. Do the gopers now think they can make up their own spelling? Or do they just not know any better?

In any case, it certainly looks like the end of editing and accuracy in publishing.

Posted by: drindl | November 17, 2009 10:54 AM | Report abuse

Blade, I have to take issue with that. What did those elections prove, except that Corzine was wildly unpopular --think maybe it might have something to do with Goldman Sachs?

And Deeds not only ran a terrible campaign, but has a speech defect and can barely talk--let's just say it out loud. He should not have been the candidate to begin with. Remember too, that McDonnell did everything he could to avoid his background and talk the moderate talk. also remember that the folks running 'conservative' lost.

Also that the R party is far more divided than the Ds.

Posted by: drindl | November 17, 2009 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Ah, just like the old days. Welcome back, Jake.

@drindl - The residents of Virginia and New Jersey disagree with the notion that it's all in CC's head.

It's an interesting point on retirements. I would argue 1982 is the more apt analogy than 1994 or 2006.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | November 17, 2009 10:37 AM | Report abuse

ditto that one, bsimon and shrink. CC can't seem to think about much else but 'republican resurgence' even though it's happening mostly inside his head.

but we know already what the MSM narrative will be going into the next election... a steady drumbeat of 'Bad News for Democrats' whether there is or not.

Posted by: drindl | November 17, 2009 10:32 AM | Report abuse

As long as this blog has descended into Palinphilia (thanks, scriv!) ...

Nate Silver has stated a number of times that he thinks SHP will run for the GOP Presidential nod in 2012 and now he posts his reasons.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/11/why-palin-will-run-for-president-in.html

Posted by: mnteng | November 17, 2009 10:28 AM | Report abuse

Look, all of you Palin anal huffers just don't get it. Palin is not disliked for anything having to do with her family life, her children, or the soap opera surrounding her daughter's marriage and deparation.

People have an unfavorable view of her because she won't get out of our face. If she wants to write books, do a talk show and make money, fine. It is the sonstant trying to get her face on TV and in the press anyway she can just like the octomom, or Carrie Prejean or the bubbleboy family.

And she is disliked by a great many of us because she associates herself with that slimy bunch of tea baggers and racists and hatemongers on the right who are in this not to governmen the country and solve problems but for the sake of some childish, puerile revenge fantasy to get back at Barack Obama for winning an election and occupying a Presidential office they seem to think belongs to their silly, little isolated claque of morons.

Posted by: jaxas | November 17, 2009 10:27 AM | Report abuse

I think he's caught up in the 'republican resurgence' meme
______________________________

Now it is time for someone to say the Republican Rising! is not what the Fix is all about. Then, after this afternoon's increasingly noxious insult exchanges, this day will be complete, all the other elements are in place.

Posted by: shrink2 | November 17, 2009 10:23 AM | Report abuse

If the GOP won't nominate Gov. Palin, then I hope third parties like the TEA Party woo her.

Posted by: JakeD | November 17, 2009 10:17 AM | Report abuse

AndyR3 writes
"The GOP has more retirements in the house and the senate than the Democrats this year"


That The Fix didn't make that point was an error on his part. I think he's caught up in the 'republican resurgence' meme and is missing the forest for the trees.


.

Posted by: bsimon1 | November 17, 2009 10:10 AM | Report abuse

The lynch mob just doesn't understand why anyone would be upset about their little party:

"The plan by the Danville TEA Party Patriots to burn Rep. Tom Perriello (D-VA) and Speaker Nancy Pelosi in effigy -- a sort of Tea-Party Burning Man -- has been called off, Greg Sargent reports:

"We will not be going forward with the plan," a crestfallen Coleman told me by phone moments ago. "We had to cancel it. The property owner won't allow us to do it. The media attention was something that he didn't want."

Coleman said he was upset that people had gotten the wrong idea about his plan. "I'm disappointed that the story got out of hand and people misinterpreted something we thought would be a little historical lesson. They made people believe that we were committing an act of violence," he said, "

Posted by: drindl | November 17, 2009 10:05 AM | Report abuse

margaret writes
"I’m intrigued by #8. Might it be that auto-dialer polls are accurate in off-year elections (and maybe primaries, too) because they successfully connect with the kind of people who are likely to vote in off-year and primary elections?"

I suspect that the robo-polls did a better job at identifying likely voters this year. That may be true for off-year elections in general. Most likely voter screens exclude people who aren't registered, or didn't vote in the prior election. In presidential years, those aren't good ways to screen likely voters - particularly not last year. But for off year elections, that's a very good way to screen likely voters.

Posted by: bsimon1 | November 17, 2009 10:04 AM | Report abuse

scrivener50:

Never (get used to it). Look out! The silent black helicopters are hovering right above you ...

Posted by: JakeD | November 17, 2009 10:02 AM | Report abuse

Re: Item #5: that should read "ACTING President Joe Biden". If pResident Obama is not a natural-born citizen, then Biden has legally been President since 12 noon on January 20, 2009.

Posted by: JakeD | November 17, 2009 9:58 AM | Report abuse

JUST WHO IS SUBSIDIZING PALIN'S BOOK? NO WAY A MAJOR PUBLISHING HOUSE WOULD SELL IT SO CHEAP SO SOON, UNLESS...

...POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEES OR LOBBYING GROUPS ARE PAYING OFF THE PUBLISHER? OR BUYING LARGE QUANTITIES TO RIG THE BEST-SELLER LISTS?

Chris, how about pressing the publisher on any side deals involving the publication of what appears to be a perfect-bound piece of political campaign literature...

Also, while you're offering up all this Palinphilia -- why not run the Newsweek cover of Sarah in running shorts? If big media is going to pander, let's go all the way! Give us the long view. And think of it, you'll be promoting both Palin and a Wa-Po property. What's not to like? Give us the visual!


***


What Good is Health Care Reform When a...

SECRET MULTI-AGENCY FED PROGRAM TORTURES, IMPAIRS, PERSECUTES THOUSANDS OF U.S. CITIZENS WITH NATIONWIDE SILENT MICROWAVE/LASER WEAPONS SYSTEMS, LOCAL VIGILANTISM: VETERAN JOURNALIST

http://nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-america OR http://NowPublic.com/scrivener RE: "GESTAPO USA"

***
U.S. CENSORS THE NET AS OBAMA LECTURES CHINA ON NET CENSORSHIP

More "Stupid 'Humint' Surveillance Tricks" By "Fusion Center" Operatives

http://nowpublic.com/u-s-censors-net-obama-lectures-china-net-censorship

Note: the price of reporting these stories is constant interference with my telecommunications -- not just censorship, but malicious tampering that constitutes harassment. When will the Obama administration wake up and smell the police state that makes a mockery of the rule of law and is subverting its policies from within?

Posted by: scrivener50 | November 17, 2009 9:55 AM | Report abuse

At least Newsweek didn't Photoshop her into a bikini holding a rifle. What's funny is the headline referring to "How do you solve a problem like Maria" completely missing the point that Maria was the HERO and not a problem at all (except to the Nazis, the Countess, and two nuns). Keep up the attacks, and she will carry every State except the right and LEFT coasts.

Posted by: JakeD | November 17, 2009 9:51 AM | Report abuse

should be 'hardcore' or 'hardcase' or perhaps 'headcase' rightwing.

Posted by: drindl | November 17, 2009 9:49 AM | Report abuse

"For its cover photo on Sarah Palin, Newsweek elected to recycle a picture taken by Runner’s World depicting the former governor in her jogging outfit. Palin has released a statement blasting the photo. “The out-of-context Newsweek approach is sexist and oh-so-expected by now,” she said."

..A photo she approved before. The silly tart lives to whine. That's why she's so popular with the tiny hardcare rightwing. Like toddlers, have only two speeds -- whining and tantrum.

Posted by: drindl | November 17, 2009 9:40 AM | Report abuse

Yawn-- another day, another Sarah Palin puff piece. What else is new?

Posted by: drindl | November 17, 2009 9:35 AM | Report abuse

dbitt:

Funny how you blame Gov. Palin for a price war that Wal*Mart declared against Amazon.com. Do you have any actual information how much those outlets purchased the books for?

Posted by: JakeD | November 17, 2009 9:33 AM | Report abuse

Palin's eagerness to put the Reverend Wright issue front and center is an example of just how amateurish she is at the game of politics. McCain's team began to see early on that the Wright issue was resonating with the American people but not in a direction favorable to McCain.

Notwithstanding the media's obsession with running and re-running and re-re-running the endless loops of Wright "G-Damning America", the issue just didn't work. Not only that, Palin seems to have entirely miossed that media obsession. I suppose one can chalk that up to the fact that she doesn't watch TV and doesn't read newspapers and magazines because that story was all over the media in the summer of 2008.

This tells me that Palin actually believes that tiny segment of the American electorate that just loooooves those sort of red meat, anti-Obama stories is the real "Ammurica". That is why she can never be taken as anything but part of the crazy, flaky, crackpot, lunatic fringe of the conservative movement and the very reason that the republican brand is in the toilet.

Posted by: jaxas | November 17, 2009 9:31 AM | Report abuse

Amazon is selling the book for $14.99 as of this morning. The pre-release price is no longer in effect.
BTW, at $9, Sarah isn't making any money because the publisher isn't making any. Yeah, she'd be racking up sales but that doesn't translate into bucks in the bank-- you need to make MORE than the cost to print and distribute (plus advertising) in order to earn a profit, analgesic33. At $9, I doubt the publisher is breaking even.

Posted by: dbitt | November 17, 2009 9:22 AM | Report abuse

Did either of Obama's books have an index? At least she is honest about having a co-author.

Posted by: JakeD | November 17, 2009 9:18 AM | Report abuse

Parker,
The people who support Palin, don't want results they do want a soap opera. These are the same people who were cheering for President Obama to fail. The extreme right and the extreme left both hate the other sides views so much that they don't care if they win just that the other side loses.

This is the same mentality as an extreme college sports fan (the saying I cheer for two teams; The Red Sox and whoever is playing the Yankees comes to mind)

Posted by: AndyR3 | November 17, 2009 9:17 AM | Report abuse

"for Palin's book....no other way will piss off the left than making it a best seller and giving sarah the money....."

==
Of course it will be a best seller. Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity always produce best sellers. Eskimo Barbie will too. this way the people who support them can claim to read books, but without the hassel of learning things.

Posted by: elijah24 | November 17, 2009 9:01 AM | Report abuse

Palin has botched her reentry into the public arena. She is simply the same whiny, overmatched figure she was during last year's campaign. Americans do not care for someone so wrapped up in their own perceived slights and ongoing grudges. The book and her appearance on Oprah were absolute disasters.

She would have been better served spending the last year studying up and then dishing out actual policy advice or proposals. Americans want results, not a soap opera.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: parkerfl1 | November 17, 2009 8:49 AM | Report abuse

I’m intrigued by #8. Might it be that auto-dialer polls are accurate in off-year elections (and maybe primaries, too) because they successfully connect with the kind of people who are likely to vote in off-year and primary elections? I’m thinking that land-line owning, home-when-you-call type people are generally older, more affluent, whiter and perhaps more civically conscientious – which is pretty much the profile of people likely to vote in off-year and primary elections.
Just a thought.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | November 17, 2009 8:47 AM | Report abuse

Stankonia is the best album on that list. That was Outkast's swan song, since according to a friend of mine in the record industry Big Boy and Andre 2000 can't even be in the same room together anymore.

Posted by: AndyR3 | November 17, 2009 7:48 AM | Report abuse

Charlie Cook is right to dispell the 1994 comparisons. The GOP has more retirements in the house and the senate than the Democrats this year, and while many of these seats aren't really competitive the RNCC will have to spend money in them especially if the Democrats in those districts are self-funded. Taken with the risk that you may have a conservative party surge in some races forcing the RNC to battle on two fronts should limit the gains that the GOP may make.

Now this is all dependent on unemployment staying above 10% through April, which I don't think will happen. I think the pressure that the democrats are feeling now will be greatly reduced when they pass healthcare reform, and once the unemployment rate shows signs of improvement (like every other indicator has already).

Posted by: AndyR3 | November 17, 2009 7:41 AM | Report abuse

AMAZON.COM --> $9.00 PRE-RELEASE PRICE

for Palin's book....no other way will piss off the left than making it a best seller and giving sarah the money.....

$9.00 at AMAZON.COM

Posted by: analgesic33 | November 17, 2009 6:21 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company