The political elite are beginning to deal with the new normal.
From the Wall Street Journal:
"Americans don't want to be governed from the left or the right," Scott Rasmussen tells the American Legislative Exchange Council, a conference of 1,500 conservative and moderate legislators. "They want, like the Founding Fathers, to largely govern themselves with Washington in a supporting—but not dominant—role. The tea party movement is today's updated expression of that sentiment."
"…Mr. Rasmussen has a partial answer for Mr. Emanuel's question, and it lies in a significant division among the American public that he has tracked for the past few years—a division between what he calls the Mainstream Public and the Political Class.
"To figure out where people are, he asks three questions: Whose judgment do you trust more: that of the American people or America's political leaders? Has the federal government become its own special interest group? Do government and big business often work together in ways that hurt consumers and investors? Those who identify with the government on two or more questions are defined as the political class.
"Now the percentage of people identifying with the political class has clearly declined into single digits, while those in the mainstream public have grown slightly. A majority of Democrats, Republicans and independents all agree with the mainstream view on Mr. Rasmussen's three questions. "The major division in this country is no longer between parties but between political elites and the people," Mr. Rasmussen says.
Forget 1994, it’s 1980
Familiar refrains from salivating Republicans continue to swirl around recreating the 1994 Republican takeover of the House. But the New York Times, of all places, drew more frightening parallels between 2010 and 1980, when another conservative rebellion reshaped Congress.
From The New York Times:
“In 1980, shocked Senate Democrats lost 12 seats in a rout that ended the Congressional careers of such notable lawmakers as George McGovern of South Dakota, Birch Bayh of Indiana, Frank Church of Idaho, Warren Magnuson of Washington and Gaylord Nelson of Wisconsin.
“Swept into office by the landslide victory of Ronald Reagan were a number of conservatives, including Jeremiah A. Denton Jr. of Alabama, Mack Mattingly of Georgia, Paula Hawkins of Florida, Steve Symms of Idaho and several others whose notion of the role of government and Congress was markedly different from those they succeeded.
“…The Senate of 2011 could well be the province of Rand Paul of Kentucky, Mike Lee of Utah, Sharron Angle of Nevada, Ken Buck of Colorado and perhaps Joe Miller of Alaska.”
Still bad news for Dems…
Many nonpartisan analysts now believe Republicans will recapture the House in November (link to WSJ article).
The Rothenberg Political report downgraded the re-election chances of five House Democrats, and the Cook Political Report did the same with 10 House Democrats.
From WSJ:
“Early next week, the Cook report expects to downgrade the ratings of an additional 10 Democratic candidates, said David Wasserman, the report's editor for House races. The Cook report would then list nearly 80 seats as at "substantial risk," Mr. Wasserman said. Republicans need to capture a net 39 seats to take control of the House.”
Normal news for Dems…
Nate Silver from 538 and NYT is one of my favorite pollsters (along with Scott Rasmussen on the conservative side).
Coming off the heels of a Gallup poll that showed Republicans with a huge 10-point generic ballot lead, dim Democratic prospects just dimmed further and resulted in the largest lead Republicans have ever held in the nearly 70-year history of the survey.
Silver’s conclusion:
"This is not the situation the Democrats faced earlier this summer, when the generic ballot was closer to even. Back then, a 5-point Republican lead on the generic ballot would have been pretty big news; now, it seems to be the new normal."
Further complicating things for Democrats are Silver’s future predictions.
He explained that Gallup and other generic ballot surveys are still polling registered rather than likely voters. This makes a big difference – because a poll of registered voters doesn’t mean anything, whereas a poll of likely voters gives a good snapshot of where the voting electorate stands at one particular time. Silver’s web site, 538, tracks polling results more obsessively than most and shows the gap between registered and likely voters at 4 points – in the Republicans’ favor.
This means a 10-point generic ballot lead is roughly equivalent to a 14-point likely-voter lead. The worst-case scenario for Democrats, according to Silver, is an eight or nine point deficit. Add in an enthusiasm gap showing that Republicans are twice as likely to vote and a historic reliability of GOP voters to show up for midterms, and things don’t look good for Democrats.
From Politico:
"In September 2006, just before Democrats won a 30-seat sweep to take control of the House, they led with 52 percent to 41 percent in the Gallup generic ballot test. Republicans need to net 39 seats to win control in the next Congress, and several major political prognosticators have said Republicans have a real shot at surpassing that number to win the House."
The left continues to crack up
Politico reports that some of the most vulnerable Democratic lawmakers are distancing themselves from Pelosi and the Democratic national agenda, with incumbents from conservative districts campaigning furiously in defiance of Pelosi. Apparently, the roster of upset Dems spans across the country, from Northeast to South and across the Midwest.
Comments