RightDataUSA

Demographics and Elections Commentary tagged with No

10/17/2024: 2024 Election Analysis: Will Republicans Hold the House? [RightDataUSA]


Current U.S. House breakdown by district
(Map created using mapchart.net)

1. Competitiveness

As happens every two years, all 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives (one for each congressional district) are up for re-election. Some folks equate this to 435 flips of a coin, and believe that -- with some luck -- Republicans could win 250 seats, maybe 300, maybe more!!!! That rosy outlook reflects considerable ignorance as to how these districts are constructed.

The fact is that somewhere around 360 of those 435 districts are not competitive at all and have only the most miniscule chance of changing hands; they are almost 100% safe for whichever party currently holds them. That leaves approximately 75 districts which are truly competitive to any extent -- or which should be hotly contested, but sometimes aren't. These 75 are the ones where control of the House will be determined in a few weeks, and of those 75 it's really only about 40 which are truly "toss-ups" this year.

We use objective criteria to determine which districts are the "swing" districts; in addition to recent past results, we consider:

  • Partisan composition of the district
  • Suitability of the candidates to the district
  • Potential effects of other races (like the one for President) on downballot elections like these
  • How hard the parties are trying to win, which is easily measured in terms of $$$$

That last one is a biggie, but the others are also important.



Regarding the suitability of the candidates:

Democrats always try to run the most liberal candidates possible in House races, but in a marginal district they must (with the help of their army of media allies) attempt to disguise their nominee as a "moderate" because they understand that most voters in a marginal district would find an in-your-face liberal nutbucket to be repugnant.

Once elected, Democrat "moderates" normally march in goose-step with their liberal colleagues. Even when narrowly in the minority as is the case today in the House, Democrats voting as a united bloc is nearly always sufficient to thwart any unwanted legislation. This happens because there are always enough liberal Republicans in the party's "big tent" to cross over and assist the Democrats whenever the Republican establishment (GOPe) desires for that to occur. Sometimes, particularly on legislation which has no chance of passing the Senate or being signed into law, the Democrat puppetmasters will permit their most vulnerable House members to temporarily leave the plantation and cast a non-liberal vote. Which they can then highlight to the voters back home as a sign of their alleged "independence" when re-election time rolls around. Of course there is no real independence; they vote as they are told to -- always.

Those who control the Republican party (and especially its purse strings) also seek to run the most liberal candidates possible in House races -- even in solid Republican districts -- because the GOPe finds anyone who is even remotely conservative to be repugnant. On this topic, the leadership of both parties are in agreement. Occasionally, the GOPe is correct in running a moderate-liberal if the nature of the district is inappropriate for a nominee who is perceived as being too far to the right.

Based on the above criteria, we have identified 62 districts which should be competitive this year. This list is not substantially different from the one we published over a year and a half ago, but the data associated with these districts is now up-to-date. In addition to the potential flippers, there's also one district in Washington which features two Republicans and zero Democrats running; the incumbent Republican is a Trump-hating impeachment RINO while the challenger is a solid conservative. If an upset should occur there it won't count as a GOP pickup since they already hold that seat, but it would be a welcome development nonetheless.

2. Background

After the 2022 elections, Republicans controlled the House by the margin of 222-213. Since that time there have been 8 special elections held to replace representatives who retired or died. Seven of those 8 were won by the same party which originally held the seat. The lone exception occurred in New York in February when Democrats won the special election in NY-3 to replace conservative Republican George ("Miss Me Yet?") Santos. That election was necessitated when the Stupid Party decided to expel Santos from Congress in December, 2023 for allegedly being so corrupt that he might as well have been a Democrat. But he voted like a conservative which, come to think of it, probably didn't help his case with the party leadership.

The have been three other resignations or deaths for which special elections have not yet been held (or will not be held), and the GOP currently has a 220-212 advantage in the House. Because two of the three vacancies exist in solid Democrat districts (NJ-9, TX-18) which will be easily retained in November, the Democrats effectively have 214 seats going into the election which means they require a net gain of merely 4 seats to seize control.

3. Belated Redistricting

Congressional redistricting -- the redrawing of U.S. House district lines -- took place in all states prior to the 2022 elections, except of course in the six (Alaska, Delaware, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming) which have only one district that comprises the entire state and therefore there are no district lines.

After 2022 however, a handful of states redrew their districts. This will have a net effect of close to zero on the partisan composition of Congress in 2025, but will result in significant changes within the affected states.

In North Carolina the Democrat-controlled state Supreme Court in 2020 (and then again in 2022) chose to illegally bypass the Republican-controlled legislature and mandated district lines which favored Democrats. In 2022 the voters of the Tarheel State delivered a GOP majority to the Court. The Court then began acting lawfully and returned the task of line-drawing to the legislature, where it belongs. As a result, Republicans will almost certainly be picking up three House seats (NC-6, NC-13, NC-14) from Democrats on election day.

However this windfall will be negated by restricting-related outcomes in Alabama, Louisiana and New York. In the two southern states, partisan Democrat judges demanded that two conservative White Republicans (one in Alabama, one in Louisiana) be replaced in the House by two liberal black Democrats. Barry Moore (AL-2) and Garret Graves (LA-6) are the two Republicans who will be out of work after 2024 because of these racist court rulings.

In New York, Democrats in 2022 were forced to settle for a district map that was only a slight improvement over the one from which they had benefitted in 2020; they had tried for a hyper-partisan gerrymander which would have all but eliminated Republicans (it would have been something like 22 Democrats and just 4 Republicans) from the New York congressional delegation. In March of 2024, New York Democrats tried once again to gerrymander the state's congressional districts in their favor, and they succeeded without any resistance from the GOP. We wrote about this in detail at the time it occurred.

Having already picked up NY-3 in the Santos debacle, NY Democrats ensured that their pickup would not revert to the GOP in November (and it won't). Additionally, they have altered the Syracuse-Utica area district of freshman Republican Brandon Williams to severely endanger him, making it all but certain for the Democrats to go +1 in New York. At least +1. Redistricting greatly altered no other New York districts, though it did make NY-18 a little safer for liberal freshman Democrat Pat Ryan. However it always was probable that New York and California would be bloodbaths for the Republicans in 2024. That logical assertion is based on the sheer number of close (fluke) House wins which the GOP somehow achieved in those liberal states in 2022, and many close/fluke outcomes were likely to be reversed in 2024 with or without the assistance of Democrat gerrymandering.

One other state -- Georgia -- redrew its lines after 2022 by a court order similar to the one which affected Alabama and Louisiana. Democrats have been fuming ever since that ruling came down because Republicans found a way to comply with the racist ruling without sacrificing any of their currently-held seats. We also wrote about that in detail at the time it occurred.

Even counting New York at only -1 for the Republicans, that, along with the -2 which is guaranteed from Alabama and Louisiana means a break-even as the result of belated redistricting despite the upcoming GOP bonanza in North Carolina.

4. The 62 Most-Flippable Districts

These do not include the North Carolina, Alabama and Louisiana districts already mentioned above, but does include NY-22 (Williams) because it is not quite 100% certain that the district will be won by a Democrat. The following 62 districts are the ones which should be strongly sought by both parties -- but it doesn't work out that way in all cases, as we will illustrate. Several of the listed districts, mostly ones held by Democrats, are not very likely to flip despite the vulnerability of the Democrat incumbents. Or at least not nearly as likely as they should be, mainly because the GOP does not have infinite funds to work with, while the Democrats (via their "ActBlue" money laundry) apparently do.

Some are finally beginning to catch on to the illegal activities of ActBlue, but it's too late to do anything about it in this election cycle and Democrats are likely to be able to purchase a significant number of House and Senate seats which might otherwise be far more tenuous.

Here are the 62 most likely potential flippers, by region. The bloodiest battlegrounds are highlighted, and some which probably won't be so bloody come with brief explanations.

Northeast (16):
  • CT-5: Hayes (D)
  • ME-2: Golden (D)
  • NJ-3: open (D) -- D+5 district, limited GOP funds are better spent elsewhere
  • NJ-7: Kean (R)
  • NY-1: LaLota (R)
  • NY-2: Garbarino (R) -- Democrats have other far better pickup opportunities in NY
  • NY-4: D'Esposito (R)
  • NY-17: Lawler (R)
  • NY-18: Ryan (D)
  • NY-19: Molinaro (R)
  • NY-22: Williams (R)
  • PA-1: Fitzpatrick (R)
  • PA-7: Wild (D) -- R+2 district but Republicans seemingly conceding defeat anyway
  • PA-8: Cartwright (D)
  • PA-10 Perry (R)
  • PA-17: DeLuzio (D) -- district rated even but same story as PA-7

Mid-Atlantic (3):
  • MD-6: open (D) -- GOP retread has little chance against mega-$$$$ Democrat
  • VA-2: Kiggans (R) -- could be a battleground but GOPe ($$$) loves this moderate freshman
  • VA-7: open (D)

South (2):
  • FL-13: Luna (R) -- local (biased) "shock" poll showed her losing; even Rats don't believe that
  • NC-1: Davis (D)

Midwest (13):
  • IA-1: Miller-Meeks (R)
  • IA-2: Hinson (R) -- a rare potential battleground that Democrats declined to compete in
  • IA-3: Nunn (R)
  • IL-17: Sorenson (D) -- only D+2 but seems farther left; GOP basically punting here
  • MI-3: Scholten (D) -- only D+1 but another GOP punt
  • MI-7: open (D)
  • MI-8: open (D)
  • MI-10: James (R)
  • MN-2: Craig (D) -- Rats have always spent big to support this carpetbagging dyke from Arkansas
  • OH-1: Landsman (D) -- another winnable district in which the Republicans have bailed
  • OH-9: Kaptur (D) -- Republicans showing a faint pulse here, but not much more
  • OH-13: Sykes (D) -- see OH-1, and this district is even MORE winnable than that one
  • WI-3: Van Orden (R)

Great Plains-Mountain West (8):
  • CO-3: open (R)
  • CO-8: Caraveo (D)
  • KS-3: Davids (D) -- yet another R+ district with a radical leftist Rat incumbent; GOP punts again
  • MT-1: Zinke (R)
  • NE-2: Bacon (R)
  • TX-15: de la Cruz (R) -- a marginal district where the Republican seems to be safe
  • TX-28: Cuellar (D) -- Democrat with ethical issues; Republicans let him completely slide
  • TX-34: Gonzalez (D)

West (20):
  • AK-At Large: Peltola (D)
  • AZ-1: Schweikert (R)
  • AZ-6: Ciscomani (R)
  • CA-3: Kiley (R)
  • CA-9: Harder (D) -- D+5 isn't that far left for CA but GOP pulled the plug to play defense elsewhere
  • CA-13: Duarte (R)
  • CA-22: Valadao (R)
  • CA-27: Garcia (R)
  • CA-40: Kim (R) -- she's no conservative and has a lot of $$$; Rats are sort of giving her a pass this time
  • CA-41: Calvert (R)
  • CA-45: Steel (R)
  • CA-47: open (D)
  • CA-49: Levin (D)
  • NM-2: Vasquez (D)
  • NV-1: Titus (D)
  • NV-3: Lee (D) -- a vulnerable but well-funded Rat in a marginal district; GOP not trying hard enough
  • NV-4: Horsford (D) -- ditto
  • OR-5: Chavez-DeRemer (R)
  • WA-3: Perez (D)
  • WA-8: Schrier (D) -- district is more marginal than it appears, but Republicans haven't noticed

As noted above, the most competitive districts are bolded. A little more (34) than half of the listed districts fit that description. Of these 34, 11 are currently held by Democrats and 23 by Republicans. That's not a good ratio.

There are some others which are perhaps a small amount behind in terms of competitiveness. They are:
  • CT-05 -- GOP candidate from '22 back for a rematch; came within 1 point last time
  • MI-10 -- also a 2022 rematch and it was very close (0.5%) then
  • MT-1 -- and yet another rematch; Zinke should win somewhat comfortably
  • NV-1 -- a D+1 district in which the GOP is at least trying to compete
  • PA-1 -- the 4th 2022 rematch in this section; lots of D $$$ here (unlike '22) but probably won't prevail
  • PA-8 -- an R+4 district held by a very wealthy slimy trial lawyer D incumbent; don't get your hopes up

Three of those are currently GOP districts and three are held by Democrats. Add them to the 34 super-contested districts and the Republicans have the potential to lose 26 marginal seats, the Democrats 14.

The 40 most competitive districts are mostly in states which are toss-ups at the presidential level (AZ, MI, NC, NV, PA, WI) or ones which the bumbling Word Salad Queen is guaranteed to win (CA, CO, NE*, NJ, NM, NY, OR, VA, WA).

Only six of the 40 battleground districts lie in states that Trump should win (AK, IA, ME*, MT, TX). Eleven lie in the swing states and 23 are in states where Trump's probability of victory ranges from "very unlikely" to "utterly impossible". If there is any presidential coattail effect in that latter group, it is hardly going to be beneficial for GOP House candidates.

[* ME-2 and NE-2 are in states which split electoral votes. Trump is likely to win ME-2 and lose NE-2, replicating the 2020 outcome in those two districts.]

In these 40 districts, Democrats have raised more money in 30 of them and have spent more money in 30 of them. Republicans have the financial edge in only 10 of the 40. As we've stated several times before: there is no election in this country, at any level, in which Democrats cannot outspend Republicans (often by astronomical amounts) if they wish to do so. Money alone doesn't determine the outcome of an election, but having more than your opponent surely doesn't hurt.



The results in the other districts listed above are not likely to be as close as they should be. Republicans are not trying as hard as they might in R-leaning districts like KS-3, OH-9, OH-13 and PA-7. They are also not terribly competitive in some districts which lean only slightly to the left (in the D+1 to D+4 range) such as IL-17, MD-6, MI-3, MN-2, NV-3, NV-4, OH-1, PA-17 and TX-28. These represent blown opportunities, although if a "red" wave somehow materializes there may be some pleasant surprises here.

There are about a dozen districts which have not been mentioned previously but could change partisan hands in November; it would require moderate to major upsets in order to wind up doing so. Some of these are really just pipe dreams for one party or the other, and the majority of them are not even being seriously contested (financially) although some are. We enumerate them just to cover all the bases:
  • AZ-2: Crane (R)
  • CO-4: open (R -- Lauren Boebert moving over from CO-3)
  • FL-9: Soto (D)
  • FL-27: Salazar (R)
  • FL-28: Gimenez (R)
  • IN-1: Mrvan (D)
  • NH-1: Pappas (D)
  • NH-2: open (D)
  • OR-4: Hoyle (D)
  • OR-6: Salinas (D)
  • TN-5: Ogles (R)
  • WI-1: Steil (R)

5. Conclusion

Add it all up and the probability of the GOP remaining in charge of the House appears to be less than 50% (perhaps much less), barring a clear shift to the right between now and November 5. As we have documented, there are likely to be more tight races in Republican-held districts than there will be in Democrat-held ones.

Anything can happen in a close election, in case you've somehow forgotten 2020.

Even if the GOP wins as many as half of the most precarious 40 districts, which is by no means certain to happen, that would make it +6 for the Democrats and 220-215 control of the House.

When Democrats rule a legislative body by even one seat, they govern with an iron fist as if they have 100% control; when Republicans face the same margins -- as they currently have in the House and will in the Senate next year -- they become even more timid than usual (they aren't really comfortable with the concept of "governing") and act as if they have control of nothing. Which, in effect, they don't. And good luck with Senate "control" anyway with traitors like Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins and Lindsey Graham in the GOP caucus -- assuming that none of them switch parties after 2024.

The difference between how the parties behave in advantageous situations will be quite evident beginning in January, unless the Republicans can stem the tide of potential House losses and cling to power, such as it is with a twerp like Mike Johnson in command. As spineless as the GOP leadership is, that party's control of the House at least means that the Trump agenda (assuming he wins the presidency) is not immediately D.O.A. as it would be under racist election-denying Speaker Hakeem Homeboy, and it also means we would avoid a never-ending series of Trump impeachments.

Vote hard.

Tags:

2024 House "Red" wave in the House? Not likely


3/13/2024: [Ohio] If the presidential slate is set, will Ohio's GOP voters still show up for the U.S. Senate primary? [Ohio Capital Journal]


Photo credit: WCMH-TV

The photo shows the three GOP Senate candidates, Larry, Moe(reno) and Curly, during a recent debate. Leftist Matt Dolan is the stooge who is positioned on the right. Moreno isn't really a stooge of course, but he's certainly surrounded by them here. Speaking of being positioned on the right, the gaslighting article which accompanies that photo was written by an ultra-liberal NPR media twerp and therefore reads like a Dolan campaign commercial.


The past: In 2022 in many important statewide elections, there was nothing to vote for in the Democrat primaries because their nominee had already been anointed. The same is true in 2024. That means Democrat party puppetmasters and Democrat voters are free to spend time and money influencing the outcome of Republican primary elections for their own benefit.

Like Nimrod Haley did during the brief time when she was supposedly a viable presidential candidate, other liberal Republicans like Matt Dolan are desperately seeking Democrat votes in their primary battles against actual Republicans. This is nothing new for Dolan, a left-wing state legislator who ran for the U.S. Senate in 2022 and is running again this year. In 2022 he begged Democrats to vote for him in the GOP primary, because otherwise he stood zero chance against Trump-endorsed J.D. Vance.

That tactic came closer to succeeding than it should have. In polls taken only a few weeks before the 2022 Ohio primary, Dolan was barely cracking double-digits in what was essentially a three-way race with Vance and Josh Mandel. Mandel, the former state Treasurer, had been a milquetoast candidate against Sherrod Brown in 2012 and Brown mopped the floor with him. That happened despite the fact that the Republicans actually competed on nearly equal financial footing with the Democrat, which has become quite an uncommon occurrence in contested states since that time.

With the help of thousands of Democrat voters and the endorsements of other liberal Republicans, Dolan surged in the final voting to over 23%, just a fraction of a percentage point behind Mandel. Vance of course won that primary, but with barely 30% of the overall vote. Vance didn't break the one-third mark even though he had the endorsement of Donald Trump and the endorsement of former primary opponent Bernie Moreno. Moreno had dropped out of the race in February of 2022, heroically sacrificing his campaign in order to avoid a damaging split of the conservative primary vote.



The present: There's another three-way race in Ohio in 2024 for the Republican nomination to the U.S. Senate. Having patiently waited his turn, Moreno is back for another run and has Trump's endorsement. That endorsement was made in December but, oddly, has not resulted in a great leap forward for Moreno in the polls. The next poll after Trump's blessing actually showed Moreno with a smaller lead over liberal Dolan and moderate Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose.

Subsequent polls did show a small bump for Bernie, however a poll which came out this morning puts Moreno down by 3 points to the liberal Dolan with many voters still undecided less than one week from election day. That poll also shows incumbent ultra-liberal Democrat Sherrod Brown winning vs. all three GOP candidates though not yet breaking 40% against any of them.

Brown, like all Democrat Senate nominees in competitive states, has an astronomical advantage in campaign cash over his Republican challengers. LaRose in particular has practically nothing to work with compared to his opponents in both parties. As of the end of February, Brown had raised over $33 million with nearly $14 million of it still in the bank. Dolan and Moreno each are somewhere around $2.4 million while LaRose has the piddly total of $591,000 cash-on-hand. That's not enough to compete for a hotly-contested U.S. House race in a single district these days, nevermind trying to run a statewide campaign in Ohio on such a thin shoestring.

Article author Nick Evans, evidently writing on behalf of the Dolan campaign, describes the liberal legislator as "quite conservative". This causes the remainder of the article to be read through tears of laughter by anyone who is actually familiar with Dolan. In an attempt to make Dolan palatable to other supposedly conservative Trump-haters, Evans ludicrously claims that Dolan has worked feverishly to enact the "Trump agenda" in Ohio while at the same time distancing himself from the President as much as possible.

Insofar as a political candidate is known by the company he keeps, Dolan is supported by Rob Portman, the former senator and squish who is still highly regarded in RINO circles; and the highest-ranking squish in the state, wimpy Governor Mike DeWine. LaRose is doing just about as well with high-profile endorsements as he is with campaign fundraising (pretty much none at all of either one). LaRose does have the support of liberal Republican congressman Mike Turner of Dayton.

Moreno not only has Trump in his corner, but also solid conservatives such as Senators Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, J.D. Vance, Tommy Tuberville, Marsha Blackburn and others with whom Moreno will work as part of the opposition (non-RINO) caucus in the Senate if he is elected. He is also endorsed by bigwigs such as Jim Jordan, Kari Lake, Vivek Ramaswamy, Donald Trump Jr. and (oh well) Newt Gingrich. Like them or not, they are all conservative heavyweights or were in the past (Gingrich).



Insofar as a political candidate is known by what he has actually done legislatively, here is Matt Dolan's record:
  • Pro-abortionist
  • Anti-gun
  • Supported "contact tracing" and dictatorial powers for "health" officials during the plandemic
  • Opposed arming teachers (or any armed security) in dangerous urban schools or ghetto-ized suburban schools
  • Supports the Democrat vote-buying tactic of student loan "forgiveness"
  • Supports "green" energy mandates
  • Favors higher property taxes
  • Favors taxpayer-financed handouts in corrupt ghetto areas under the guise of "neighborhood development"

Yeah Nicky, he's quite the conservative.

There is only one logical conclusion, and it's addressed to only one candidate though it's probably already too late to have a significant effect:

Drop out now, Mr. LaRose, and endorse Bernie Moreno. Don't be the person responsible for giving the puppetmasters, the media, and other Democrats a win-win in November.

Tags:

2024 Senate Ohio Moreno & the Two Stooges Win-win for Democrats


1/28/2024: [Ohio] Trump ally rises as top GOP candidate against Ohio's Sherrod Brown [The Hill]

The headline is premature since no polls (yet) show what the title claims. But it's never too early for the liberal media to begin focusing their attacks on a Republican candidate, and tying one to Trump is -- they think -- a winning strategy. It usually is, but not always. Like just two years ago in Ohio, for example.

Dysfunctional Republicans have a habit of shooting themselves in the foot via divisive primaries in critical statewide elections -- mainly because the liberal wing of the party will never back a conservative in the general election and will often actually work against one; lukewarm support like J.D. Vance got here in 2022 is pretty much all that a non-liberal GOP candidate can expect. The establishment, which controls the all-important purse strings, much prefers a liberal Democrat to a conservative Republican, and in '22 they got their way in critical Senate races in Arizona, Pennsylvania and Alaska, came close in Wisconsin and North Carolina, and only grudgingly made a token effort to help in Ohio.

This sort of fracturing and backstabbing is something Democrats never go for. First of all, they make certain that the field is clear for their chosen candidate in a Senate primary in any winnable state, thus avoiding the divisiveness. Then they support their nominees with the vast resources of their campaign finance money laundries. Deliberately sabotaging one's own nominees is idiotic, which is why only Republicans do that and not Democrats.

In a state which is not winnable for Democrats, like Missouri in 2022, they let the losers battle it out with their own money in the primary to see which one gets the honor of being stomped in the general election. They don't waste time or money on lost causes, while the Republican party, with its comparatively limited resources, starves winnable candidates in order to waste cash on ludicrously unlikely pipe dreams in places like Colorado and Washington (both of which were lost by two touchdowns), as they did in '22.

Also, the Rats do not care how outrageously liberal a candidate is and they quite obviously do not demand that only the most squishy centrist be their party's choice. If a supposedly moderate candidate can't beat a drooling liberal (see the 2022 Senate Democrat primary in Pennsylvania, for example) then the drooler is the nominee and the entire party apparatus immediately gets in line behind him.

Need proof? We've published this data before, but here again are the campaign spending figures for the swing-state Senate races in 2022. All figures shown are in millions of dollars:

StateDemocrat $Republican $
Arizona$192.4$15.5
Georgia$326.1$68.7
Nevada$64.4$18.6
New Hampshire$42.2$4.2
North Carolina$38.9$15.7
Ohio$57.7$15.6
Pennsylvania$75.7$49.4
Wisconsin$41.8$35.7


In 2022 Senate races in North Carolina and Ohio the anointed Democrats were basically unopposed in their primaries and were very well-supported financially; unlike GOP Senate candidates everywhere, who were drastically outspent. The Rats lost those two races anyway, but did (almost) everything possible to win them.

In the 2020 Senate elections they cleared the field in Colorado, Georgia twice and North Carolina, were fully united, and picked up 3 of those 4 seats.

In 2018 the same applied to Arizona and Nevada and both were successful pickups. Now in 2024 the liberal GOP establishment is, as usual, ramming "moderates" down our throats and marginalizing the supporters of "can't-win" conservatives in West Virginia and Montana and to some extent Ohio, which are the only three states where Republicans have a viable chance of flipping Senate seats from D to R. WV is a sure pickup no matter who the Republicans nominate (they still greatly prefer the squishy old Governor over the young conservative Rep.) and MT and OH are tossups at best.

In Ohio, with pro-abortionist/anti-2A state senator Matt Dolan clearly on the left no matter what fakes to the center his campaign tries, and Bernie Moreno supposedly on the right, Secretary of State Frank Larose is in the middle and will be the deciding factor in the GOP Senate primary -- can he take enough votes to win, and if he doesn't quite accomplish that then which of the other two candidates does he steal the most from to deprive them of the win? Does he split the center-right vote and make Dolan the nominee, or does he split the center-left vote and inadvertently help Moreno? Dolan, a la Nikki Haley, will beg for (and get) support from Democrat interlopers voting in the Republican primary; that is a scheme which he also used in 2022.



The most recent poll in this race is over a month old and favors Moreno -- but with merely 22% for him, and 44% still undecided. None of the three frontrunners are remotely close to pulling away from the others yet, and that may never happen unless one drops out. Larose is currently coming up way short in the money battle, but even Dolan and Moreno combined have less campaign cash-on-hand than liberal incumbent Democrat Sherrod Brown.

Trump endorsed Moreno back in December, a few days before Christmas. Trump's blessing is usually good as gold in a primary (and normally a lead balloon in all but the safest general elections, cherry-picked "winning percentage" aside), and no polls have apparently been taken since that endorsement of Moreno. Bernie ought to get a nice bump in the next one. If or when he becomes the clear favorite however, the media will begin to savage him even harder than the linked article at the top of this commentary does.

Tags:

2024 Senate Ohio Bernie Moreno for the win!


1/18/2024: [Michigan] Former GOP Congressman Justin Amash explores joining crowded Michigan Senate field [Fox News]


Photo credit: Getty

Amash started off in Congress well enough, building conservative credentials with his voting record and enhancing that "cred" by being kicked off of GOP committees in 2012 along with Kansas representative Tim Huelskamp and David Schweikert of Arizona. All three were ousted for being too far to the right to suit many of their more-powerful Republican colleagues, including milquetoast John Boehner who was Speaker at the time.

Schweikert is still in Congress -- at least for the rest of this year. He represents a very marginal and deteriorating district in the Phoenix suburbs, barely won in 2022, and Democrats are spending big to defeat him in November. They have a significant probability of doing exactly that.

Huelskamp proved to be such an irritant to the Republican leadership (he once attempted to unseat Crybaby Boehner from the speakership and replace him with Jim Jordan) that he was successfully targeted -- by Boehner and other members of his own party -- for elimination in the 2016 primary. Roger Marshall, who defeated Huelskamp in that western Kansas primary to the delight of the GOPe, has gone on to parlay his squishiness into a Senate career.

Wikipedia notes with approval that "Amash received national attention when he became the first Republican congressman to call for the impeachment of Donald Trump, a position he maintained after leaving the party". Amash abandoned the Republicans in 2019 to become a so-called independent, then flitted over to the Libertarian party before leaving Congress. Now he wants to be welcomed back into the GOP as their standard-bearer in a losing Senate election.

Amash is a gadfly who doesn't know what the hell he is or what he wants to be. Well, he knows he wants to be a senator all of a sudden but he isn't going to get that prize. And he knows he hates Israel, which really isn't sufficient to base a Senate campaign on although it might get him votes in Dearborn-istan.

He's just a charlatan who misses the attention and the payday he got when he was a self-important congressman -- especially the media adulation he received after he made clear how much of a "maverick" he is and how he hated President Trump enough to leave Trump's party and even to leave Congress. So now he's a darling of the media and others on the left, claiming to be a "principled conservative" though he is actually neither of those things.



It's true that the current GOP field for Senate in Michigan (defeated ex-Congressmen Peter Meijer and Mike Rogers and a bunch of other hopeless losers) is woeful -- aside from police chief James Craig, who we trust is not as clueless as he was in 2022 when he naively allowed Democrat operatives in disguise to deliberately gather invalid signatures for him, and was thus disqualified. After the primary Craig would be at least a 5-point underdog no matter what some recent polls have suggested. Nonetheless he remains the best option for this unlikely but still possible Senate pickup.

Amash sees a small opening and wants to capitalize.

He can get back that media adulation by torpedoing Craig and sabotaging efforts to erase the Democrat majority in the Senate. Craig may not be so easy to torpedo in the primary, what with Meijer (liberal) and Rogers (moderate) splitting the non-conservative vote. Amash is probably more likely to jump into this race as an independent than a Republican, though it would be interesting to watch GOP primary debates with Amash challenging Meijer about which of the two of them hates Donald Trump more.

Given the dangerous (as far as Amash is concerned) prospect of "President Trump" becoming a reality in 2025, an Amash campaign would attempt to stymie the possibility of Trump having a GOP-controlled Senate to work with should he somehow win, substituting instead a Rat-controlled Senate which would revive Trump's persecution where it left off. Some believe that the mass exodus of GOP incumbents from the House is being orchestrated for a similar purpose -- handing control to the opposition, just in case.

We'd much rather take our chances with Craig than Amash or any of the other pissants in the general election. The former Detroit police chief might be able to eke out a vote or two in the Detroit ghetto precincts, get within the margin of vote fraud statewide, and at least make the Rats sweat a little before their probable late-election-night-vote-dump victory here in November.

Tags:

Michigan 2024 Senate James Craig Yes Justin Amash No


10/25/2023: North Carolina Republicans Propose Harshest Gerrymander Yet [Elections Daily]


Photo credit: elections-daily.com

Looks like the NCGOP is trying for a home run here, and hopefully will get it. If the partisan Democrat NC Supreme Court had not invented a "law" and overturned the original GOP map which was submitted a couple of years ago, Republicans would have won 9 or maybe 10 at most (out of 14) seats in Congress. Now, ironically, they may have a chance to do even better (11-3). Ha ha.

The left-wing author of the linked article is outraged, naturally, yet was strangely silent about hyper-partisan Democrat gerrymanders in the recent past (Illinois, Pennsylvania, etc.) and will be gleeful about ones which are probably coming up in the near future (New York, Wisconsin, etc.).

If the Republicans can pick up 3 seats or so in North Carolina, that reduces the probability of election-denying Brooklyn homeboy Hakeem Jeffries wielding the Speaker's gavel come 2025. It probably doesn't reduce that probability enough, however. Even if "re-redistricting" between now and the 2024 elections is 100% neutral, the number of truly vulnerable Republican representatives exceeds the similar number for Democrats as things stand now.

If a minor miracle or 2 takes place in the 2024 Senate elections, the outcome could well be that the GOP loses the House but gains nominal control of the Senate.

Don't be too fast to count those North Carolina chickens, though. Lawsuits have surely been prepared in anticipation of this day, and whether those suits have any merit or not is irrelevant -- the idea, at a minimum, is to delay the implementation of this "harsh gerrymander" past 2024, so don't be surprised if that's exactly what happens.



First tactic will be to use the Alabama strategy and insist that because North Carolina is 21% black then they are "entitled" to 3 out of 14 districts on that basis.

NC is also 10% Hispanic, which could mean another entitlement of one district. Both of those racist factors would combine to limit the GOP to at most 10 out of 14 seats. Which is still much better than the 7 they hold now.

Another tactic they'll use is that the filing deadline for 2024 is coming up soon, as if that deadline can't be changed, and claim that it's "too late" now to implement a new map. That's the trick the Rats tried in 2022 in New York when they (temporarily) didn't get their way. It didn't work then, but who knows if it will now?

Tags:

North Carolina Redistricting U.S. House


9/12/2023: [South Carolina] House Republican Nancy Mace Says 'We Will Lose Next Year' If MAGA Members Bully Moderates [Mediate]


Photo credit: The Hill

Liberal GOP crybully is welcomed onto a low-rated ultra-liberal TV network in order to bash conservatives. Any "news" story pertaining to a Republican politician which contains "During an appearance on CNN..." tells you all you need to know about that politician's credibility.

Patriotic American voters who would like to see the GOP in Congress stand for something (did you know that Republicans actually control the House of Representatives?), lament the defeatist attitude and cowardly legislative inaction by squishes such as Kevin McCarthy -- and Nancy Mace. Conservative voters believe, rightly, that after 2024 the GOP is likely to lose control of the House for those reasons.

That is very likely to happen as things stand now. Demoralized conservative voters notwithstanding, another reason for the impending loss is that Democrats are preparing to pick up several seats from the effects of belated redistricting which (in all cases except North Carolina, if redistricting there ever happens) will favor Democrats across the board.

Interestingly, one belated redistricting target of Democrat racists is.... the South Carolina district which Nancy Mace represents. Democrats decided that South Carolina's delegation In Washington ain't gots enough "people of color" (Tim Scott doesn't count since he's a Republican) and specifically they have targeted Mace's CD-1, which is Charleston and vicinity, for "reparations".

The Democrat/NAACP lawsuit is now at the Supreme Court level after some liberal federal judges took the racists' side, and it has already been proven that the GOP absolutely can NOT count on that so-called "Republican" Supreme Court to do the right thing in these cases.

Won't it be funny when a stooge like Nancy Mace gets ousted by racist liberals to whom she is closer ideologically than she is to conservatives? It's not like the GOP can afford to lose this House district -- or any district -- due to the effects of Democrat racism and a compliant Court, though something about irony being delicious regarding this turn of events comes to mind.


However:

If Mace's district is redrawn and overrun by the Charleston ghetto, do not be surprised if she jumps on her broomstick and flies to a different district (perhaps CD-7) and tries to oust the GOP incumbent there. She'll have 100% support from the GOPe, just like she did in 2022 when they helped her to fight against a solid conservative in the primary. The establishment may claim publicly that it will be neutral in a matchup of incumbents, but you can count on there not being much neutrality going on behind the scenes.

CD-7 is represented by freshman Republican Russell Fry who prevailed against Trump-hating liberal incumbent Tom Rice in the 2022 primary. Oh how the GOPe must despise Fry, and would love to save Mace and dump him simultaneously. It's worth noting that Mace already has at least 4 times the amount of cash for the 2024 election as Fry does. If they battle each other, one of those two will get a lot more $$$$ from the GOPe. It won't be Fry.

Tags:

Nancy Mace South Carolina RINO U.S. House


7/24/2023: Trump's enemies pursue more and more indictments -- to ensure his 2024 nomination [NY Post]


Photo credit: AP/Charlie Neibergall

Rich Lowry, the author of the article, is what passes for a mainstream, establishment "conservative" these days, but he's right on the money with his premise here regarding the 2024 presidential election:

    Both [Democrats and Republicans] are seeking the same thing -- Trump as the Republican nominee, either so he can sweep to victory (Trump's view) or be beaten again and pay the price for his crimes (the Democrats' view). [Emphasis added, to highlight the primary objective.]

It's beyond obvious that the uniparty puppetmasters want Trump to be the presumptive GOP nominee for as long as possible, even if he doesn't quite make it to the November ballot. This includes their rigging of the opinion polls (ya know, the ones which are always claimed to be total BS except when they tell us what we wish to hear): "Pollz say Trump gonna beat Biden, this time fur shurr herp derp!!1!".

The liberal media has willingly and successfully helped Trump neuter any threat from Ron DeSantis, and have helped to enhance Trump's appeal to his base -- and only to that base -- which will sweep him to glorious primary victories but is woefully insufficient by itself to win a general election.

All this pumping of the tires gets the base giddy with excitement and makes the crash even more painful when the puppetmasters pull the rug out as close to the last minute as they can manage, sapping all enthusiasm on the right when Trump turns out not to be the nominee and some uninspiring milquetoast is instead.

There's no way Trump will support anyone else as the GOP nominee, which means he either runs as an Independent (which ensures a Democrat win) or gets a ton of write-in votes from disgruntled supporters (which ensures a Democrat win).



Even if the conspiracy theories don't play out and Trump carries the GOP banner, since he cannot win a national election by getting only the votes of his devout supporters (nobody can), the whole constant accusation, indictment and trial scenario is designed to succeed in peeling off as many undecideds/independents as possible who surely won't vote for a "criminal" for President. Unless that criminal is a Democrat.

To summarize, the idea is that whether Trump is a damaged GOP nominee or whether he runs third-party, the end result will be the same. Or so the uniparty desperately hopes.

There is one way and perhaps only one way to screw up those plans:

And that is for Joe Manchin and/or RFK to pull a "Perot" and mix things up enough that Trump can still win despite getting no more than about 40% of the popular vote in a 3-way race. That's not too far below Trump's upper limit anyway, but with two opponents splitting the anti-Trump vote he may be able to prevail with something along the lines of the outcome in 1992, when Bill Clinton and his lovely wife Bruno won with just 43%.

There might be as many folks on the left seeking a better option than Biden as there are on the right who are seeking a better option than Trump. If a third party can pull off significantly more votes from the left than the right, but not be so popular as to actually steal any GOP electoral votes, then Trump has a chance to win. However if a third party looks to be even remotely threatening, Democrats will stop at nothing to abort it.

Tags:

Donald Trump 2024 No! Wait! Now we want him OFF the ballot!


7/18/2023: GOP Uniparty Senators Threaten to Leave and Become Democrats [Conservative Treehouse]


Photo credit: The Hill

For a suddenly relevant blast from the not-too-distant past, here's an excerpt from our very own "Final 2022 election predictions" posted last November 7th:

If partisan control hangs in the balance, i.e. if Republicans end up with a 51-49 majority, the filthy whore from Alaska (who will win re-election easily), will sell herself to the highest bidder like all filthy whores do; that high bidder will be the Democrats. A la Judas Jim Jeffords 20 years ago, Murkowski will switch sides and give the Democrats control.

With the "red wave" petering out completely, there was no need for the dessicated crone from Alaska to pull a Jeffords at that time. However it appears that Murkowski along with other spineless weasels (Cornyn, Thune, Romney, etc.) now fear that the GOP might somehow take Senate control following the 2024 elections, and as always they would greatly prefer not to be in power -- at least not on the same side as those smelly conservatives, and especially not if taking control in January of 2025 is due to the fact that 1 or 2 more actual conservatives are elected next November. So Murkowski is hinting that she will bolt, and it's quite possibly not just a bluff.

She doesn't have to face the voters again until 2028, and Rigged Choice Voting in Alaska practically ensures her re-election just as it did in 2022.

The Democrats don't need to buy off this whore with their endless supply of geld -- she's already a millionaire -- but through their control of the media they can make her the greatest American hero since St. George Floyd; why, she would be single-handedly saving Democracy!!! They don't need to appeal to her greed; they can simply appeal to her gigantic ego and lust for power (or at least relevance).

Regarding the 2024 Senate elections, the puppetmasters have little to fear in West Virginia where a moderate Republican will replace an allegedly moderate Democrat. But if the uniparty establishment loses control of the primary election in places like Montana and Ohio, leading to the nomination of right-of-center candidates like Rosendale and Moreno, and then loses control of the general election and those guys somehow get past all the obstacles in their path (vote fraud, overwhelming funding disadvantages) then they figure that spells DISASTER.

For the establishment.

Of course that's not true at all, with Mitch McConnell or one of his Bitches becoming Majority Leader and being as vigorous, forceful and effective a "leader" as Frank Luntz's boy toy currently is in the House.

Speaking of Kevin McCarthy, the current odds heavily favor him handing over the Speaker's gavel to the racist Democrat election-denier from Brooklyn when the next Congress convenes in 2025, so it would be nice to have the GOP control the Senate. It would be even nicer for them to actually accomplish something with that control, but probably the most we could expect is preventing President Biden, President Harris or President Newsom from being able to pack the Supreme Court. Maybe.

Tags:

Senate RINO Lisa Murkowski Mitt Romney John Cornyn Judas Jim Jeffords


4/28/2023: Massive Supreme Court Rulings in North Carolina May Have Just Saved Republicans in 2024 [Redstate]


Photo credit: AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana

The article states, quite accurately, that a "prior left-wing court invented out of whole cloth a constitutional provision that forced the legislature to create so-called fair districts."

Last November the voters in North Carolina delivered a 5-2 Republican majority to the state Supreme Court, and today that court came through by not merely overturning the illegal judicial interference with last year's redistricting, but also restoring a voter ID law which was duly passed by the voters in 2018 before being thrown out by partisan Democrat judges.

This is all great news, although the hyperventilating in the article about the GOP picking up 4 House seats in the Tarheel State in 2024 after the maps are redrawn is not terribly realistic, however a gain of 2 or even 3 might be. On the flip side of the coin, Democrats in New York are suing because they were not allowed to implement the most ridiculously partisan gerrymander (with all due respect to Illinois) in the entire nation. The lawsuit seeks to restore that gerrymander or something very close -- if not worse.

Many of the series of fluke U.S. House victories the GOP attained in New York in 2022 -- CD-3 (Santos), CD-4 (D'Esposito), CD-17 (Lawler), CD-19 (Molinaro) and CD-22 (Williams) -- were likely to be undone in 2024 even without a new gerrymander, plus CD-1 (LaLota) and CD-11 (Malliotakis) aren't exactly 100% safe either; Malliotakis may appear safe due to the margin she received in 2022, but that's only because the Democrats ran a complete stooge against her and they will not make that mistake again.

If the Democrats prevail in New York court, it will offset the presumed North Carolina gains, and more.

Adverse changes will also be coming to the district map in Ohio and possibly other states, with South Carolina as another example. If those changes in Ohio are not implemented for the 2024 election then they definitely will be by 2026. Republicans expected to pick up 2 House seats in 2022 in Ohio while maybe sacrificing one seat (that sacrifice was pretty much mandated by liberal court order when the court rejected the Republicans' original Ohio map); what actually happened was that the Republicans picked up nothing while losing one seat, as the much ballyhooed (and mis-named) "red wave" became not even a trickle, though at least they held the U.S. Senate seat with J.D. Vance.

Because the expected gains never materialized, even a less favorable district map might do little or no damage to the composition of the Ohio congressional delegation, in which the Republicans currently hold a 10-5 edge.

Tags:

North Carolina Redistricting Democrat gerrymander overturned New York Democrat gerrymander restored


4/26/2023: [West Virginia] Joe Manchin is a dunce [Hot Air]


Photo credit: AP Photo/Susan Walsh

Actually, that's one thing he's not. The article claims that Manchin is regretting his high-profile vote which singlehandedly provided the margin for passage of the Democrats' ludicrously-named "Inflation Reduction Act" last August. But he knew exactly what he was doing at the time, and only now that the 2024 campaign season is beginning to get underway is Manchin feeling a little heat at home in West Virginia. He pretends to be a thorn in the side of his party, but when the chips are down he always comes through for the leftists.

Republicans are lining up to take Manchin on, the first one was solidly conservative representative Alex Mooney. The liberal GOP establishment therefore went into a panic, but calmed themselves down by successfully recruiting term-limited Democrat-turned-Republican Governor Jim Justice to oppose Mooney in the primary.

The RINOs and their big $$$$ donors are now able to run away from Mooney and toward Justice. Donald Trump should endorse Mooney to give Mooney's campaign some traction, but apparently that's too much of a risk to the all-important Trump Winning Percentage since Mooney is unlikely to survive the primary.

Aside from his conservatism, the RINOs' problem with Mooney is that he wasn't born in some rural hovel in the geographical center of West Virginia and therefore is doomed to always be considered an outsider like Patrick Morrissey was painted as when he ran against Manchin and lost -- basically for that reason alone -- in 2018. Morrissey has since been elected to statewide office in WV, and is running for Governor in '24 and will probably win, so the voters seem to have forgiven him for the sin of being born elsewhere. Will the voters also forgive Mooney? We very likely won't get to find out this year.

The fear is that Manchin and the media would use the same playbook against Mooney that they did against Morrissey. They also fear that Mooney is "unelectable" even in this bluest of blue states because they feel (and wish, and try their best to ensure) that all conservatives are unelectable.

It's a moot point because no way the establishment lets Mooney win the GOP primary if Justice is in the race, and maybe even if he isn't. Given that Justice will be the nominee, at this time we feel he has about a 60-40 chance of defeating Manchin. Manchin is as slimy as they come, but West Virginia voters have been fooled by him in the past and may be again in the future. Also Manchin is a good campaigner -- good enough, anyway -- and most Republicans are not. Justice won in 2016 (as a Democrat, prior to switching parties) by "only" 7 points, but the next truly tough election campaign he faces will be his first one.

If something from way out of left field happens and Mooney is the nominee, it wouldn't be surprising at all to see the state's other Senator (alleged Republican Shelley Capito) all but endorse Manchin by talking about how delighted she's been to serve with him, how wonderfully "bipartisan" he is, etc. Other RINOs will also pull out the knives and aim for Mooney's back; Mitch McConnell will see to it that Mooney is starved for funds. But as stated above, that scenario is very likely something we won't have to worry about.

Tags:

Phony "moderate" Joe Manchin West Virginia 2024 Alex Mooney Conservative Jim Justice RINO


4/9/2023: [Montana] GOP lawmakers target Tester re-election bid with 'jungle primary' bill [Helena Independent Record]


Photo credit: Thom Bridge, Independent Record

This bill has not yet become law, but Democrats are already howling with outrage because Republicans in Montana are attempting to craft an election law which exactly matches the ones used -- to great Democrat benefit -- in states such as California and Washington. Except this time the benefit, tiny though it may be, would accrue to the GOP. Hence the hypocritical outrage from the left.

The idea is to make the November, 2024 U.S. Senate election a 1-on-1 race with no interference from minor party candidates. Tester has won three times previously, with percentages of 49.2% in 2006, 48.6% in 2012, and 50.3% in 2018. In all 3 cases, the candidacy of a Libertarian was engineered in order to cost the GOP candidate enough votes to lose the election. It worked perfectly twice, and even in 2018 when Tester finally got over 50% the Libertarian eventually discovered how he was being used and manipulated, and he withdrew from the race and endorsed the Republican. But he bailed out too late to affect the outcome.

There remains the little matter of determining who the GOP nominee will be in 2024. The filing deadline is still 11 months away so there's plenty of time, however no serious Republican has as yet entered the race. One or both of the state's U.S. House incumbents (Zinke, Rosendale) probably will file. So too may some others who already hold statewide office.

Because there will be only one primary ballot instead of separate ones for each party if this law passes, Democrats will not so easily be able to utilize their effective scheme from 2022 in which leftist voters invade the Republican primary (as they did in Colorado, for example) to try to help the weakest candidates prevail.

Even with one or more good candidates running for the GOP -- preferably only one -- liberals may resort to old tricks such as placing bogus "conservatives" on the primary ballot in order to split the right-wing vote and ensure that the most liberal of the big-names becomes the Republican nominee; this obviously creates as much of a win-win scenario for the left as possible. Democrats won't have to sabotage conservatives all by themselves; the GOP establishment will be happy to take charge of that particular task.

Tags:

Senate 2024 Montana Jon Tester No more Libertarian assistance?


11/7/2022: Final 2022 election predictions! [RightDataUSA]

Sorry we've been out of touch for a couple of months (family issues), but here are some realistic predictions for what will happen Tuesday.

Tl;dr version for those with insufficient attention spans or an aversion to being realistic: the delusionals have worked themselves up into such a frenzy that even GOOD news -- Republicans going +15 or +20 and winning the House and maybe picking up a seat or two and perhaps taking control of the Senate -- will be viewed as major disappointments by those who actually believe outlier polls, people who reflexively add 10 points to GOP candidates in polls just because, and people who take ludicrous "predictions" by sources such as Newt Gingrich and Dickie Morris seriously.

Senate:

The most likely reasonable expectation is in the range of GOP -1 to GOP +1. This may sound unimpressive or pessimistic, but then reality IS normally more unimpressive than fantasy. It's not totally pessimistic either: we'll assume that Republicans hold their pair of highly endangered and marginal seats in North Carolina and Wisconsin, outcomes which are very far from certainties.

The most likely path to the -1 to +1 range is: Oz loses PA (which he will, after appearing to be winning substantially on Tuesday night) and the Republicans pick up either 0, 1 or 2 of Nevada and New Hampshire. An upset is possible but Walker will most likely lose in a runoff in Georgia, other races may be close-but-no-cigar (such as Arizona), and only if a 1994-style massacre of Democrats occurs is there any plausible chance for pickups in places like Colorado and Washington. Of the 2 Democrat-held seats which are actually tossups, Nevada is a better bet for GOP success than New Hampshire (even the right-leaning shills at Real Clear Politics have conceded that Bolduc will not win), and Nevada is pretty tenuous.

Final Senate note: if partisan control hangs in the balance, i.e. if Republicans end up with a 51-49 majority, the filthy whore from Alaska (who will win re-election easily), will sell herself to the highest bidder like all filthy whores do; that high bidder will be the Democrats. A la Judas Jim Jeffords 20 years ago, Murkowski will switch sides and give the Democrats control. If we want REAL control we need to get to 52 somehow.

Governors:

Maryland and Massachusetts are already foregone conclusions to flip from R to D and another significant possibility to do the same thing is Oklahoma. In the end, we'll guess that Stitt wins by an extremely small margin and holds Oklahoma for the GOP.

Among currently D-held seats, Pennsylvania is a lost cause but we predict the Republicans will pick up Nevada; however it better not be too close because Republicans almost never win close elections in Nevada.

Sadly, MAGA heroine Kari Lake will lose in Arizona simply because she cannot be allowed to win; she's too good. If she somehow slips through the cracks in Katie Hobbs' Fraud Machine (it's so cute that people think the Rats can't cheat because "Weer Wotching" more closely than in 2020) and ekes out a win, Lake will not be allowed to govern. Remember Evan Mechem? Lake will be Evan Mechem 2.0. The Democrats, the Democrat media and the RINO elites in Lake's own party will see to it and are probably already preparing for it by fabricating the Kari Lake version of the "Steele Dossier".

All other seats will probably be status quo though there is a decent opportunity for Tim Michels to defeat soyboi Tony Evers in Wisconsin. Republicans will blow it in Kansas, which should have been an easy pickup, and the Oregon pipe dream will turn out to be a pipe bomb as support for the "independent" Democrat who was splitting the D vote has evaporated, and her supporters have flocked back like sheep to the nutzoid D candidate. It was fun while it lasted and the final outcome will be close, but this is Oregon. Other states -- notably New York -- will be much closer than they usually are, but all realistic odds favor Democrat holds in that state and in Maine, Minnesota, Michigan, New Mexico and Colorado. Will Illinois flip, as some seem to believe? That's precious.

House:

The realistic floor for the GOP is somewhere around +10, and that's sufficient to take control but as mentioned above would be considered a crushing disappointment if that's all we get. If we see less than +10, or worse yet we see panicky Democrat predictions of gains coming true, then we know that Democrat fraud is working better than ever.

A sensible outcome without going too far overboard with the purely wishful thinking is GOP +15 to maybe as much as +20 (I know, I know, that's STILL a massive downer); anyone who truly believes, despite no evidence whatsoever, that +50, +75, +100 is viable, will need to up their meds starting Wednesday.

Newly created seats in Florida, Texas (1 of the 2 new seats), Montana and Colorado will go our way, offset by GOP reapportionment losses in places like New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Michigan and West Virginia along with D pickups of new seats in states such as Oregon and North Carolina. Florida will be the biggest win for our side, as the delegation goes from 16-11 in our favor to 20-8. Arizona might see a pickup of 2 House seats for the GOP even as both statewide Republican candidates are being frauded out of their wins.

Democrat incumbents (through defeat on Tuesday, or retirement, or redistricting) will be ousted in Wisconsin, Tennessee, Georgia, New Jersey, Ohio (Tim Ryan's old district), perhaps Iowa. There are possibilities of capturing marginal tossup Democrat-held districts in Alaska, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Nevada. There are lesser chances, but still possible pickups, in Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Maine, Maryland, and a few others. Ideas of GOP seizures of numerous endangered Democrat seats in places like Illinois and New York are nothing but illusions and not even a single pickup will result (well, maybe 1 at most) absent a "red wave" of enormous proportions.

There are only 2 GOP-held seats which are in any real danger of being lost -- unless Democrat "ballot harvesting" fraud in California claims a whole bunch more, as it did in 2018 and very well might again in 2022 -- and those 2 are Mayra Flores in TX-34 and John Gibbs in MI-3. Both are in tough fights, and Gibbs in particular will go down to defeat as the GOP establishment abandoned him the moment he defeated Trump-hating weasel Peter Meijer in the primary. As always, the GOPe would greatly prefer a liberal Democrat to a MAGA conservative.

If we have to pick a specific final number in the House, we'll go with lucky +13. We'd be delighted to be wrong about some of this (particularly Kari Lake) but we prefer predictions based in reality rather than fantasy.

Tags:

U.S. House Senate 2022 Take back the House But not the Senate


8/16/2022: [Florida] Demings up by 4 points in challenge to Rubio: poll [The Hill]

By what is surely just a remarkable coincidence, the polls which the liberal poindexters at FiveThirtyEight.com allow the public to see -- at least the ones from sources those poindexters consider to be "highly rated" -- all favor the ultra-liberal candidate. So just because us unenlightened proles have never heard of the leftist poll-takers at the University of North Florida doesn't mean they're wrong.

Still, Florida is not a slam-dunk Republican state by any means whatsoever, and even Governor DeSantis is going to have to work hard (he is a major target and is in no way going to simply cruise to re-election) but given the low quality of their Democrat opponents both Rubio & DeSantis should be moderately favored. At most.

Tags:

Senate Florida 2022 Not safe GOP?


8/12/2022: [Florida] America First Poll Shows Republican KW Miller With Double-Digit Lead Over RINO Carlos Gimenez In Florida's 28th District Primary Race [PR Newswire]


Photo credit: KW Miller for Congress

According to Ballotpedia, Trump has endorsed the RINO incumbent instead of the conservative challenger. This poll, not that it's particularly believable, might cause that endorsement to change. Not only is Gimenez a RINO who supports amnesty for illegal aliens, gun-grabbing and other liberal causes, he supported the J6 Kangaroo Kourt Kommittee even after Trump endorsed him in 2020.

Some people insist that Trump's endorsements of guaranteed-to-win-anyway Republican House incumbents have nothing to do with padding his winning percentage, but instead is a "6D Chess" maneuver to inspire loyalty from politicians who will always remember how Trump supported them (even when they didn't need it), and they will therefore support him in return.

Oh really? Here is a list of the other 15 House Republicans who Trump endorsed in 2020 and who then backstabbed him by voting for the Pelosi-Cheney-Kinzinger J6 lynch mob: Johnson (SD), Bice (OK), Moore (UT), Guest (MS), Bentz (OR), Simpson (ID), Fortenberry (NE), Newhouse (WA), Bacon (NE), Miller-Meeks (IA), Jacobs (NY), Gonzales (TX), Joyce (OH), Salazar (FL), Curtis (UT).

How's that for "loyalty", eh?

Fortenberry was ousted for some alleged technical violation that Democrats probably get away with every day, Jacobs supposedly ran away because some nutzoid leftist killed some people in Buffalo (near his district), and all of the others so far have safely won their primaries in 2022 despite their apostasy. There were 19 other Republicans who voted to persecute Trump, but at least he was smart enough not to have endorsed them previously.

8/24/2022 update: Miller lost by over 60 points. Believe lunatic polls at your own risk.

Tags:

U.S. House Florida 2022 Backstabbing RINOs Lunatic poll


8/9/2022: [Wyoming] Data: Liz Cheney's Plan to Win GOP Primary with Democrat Votes Is Failing [Breitbart]


Photo credit: pbs.com

From the article: "Wyoming law states that voters must be affiliated with a particular party to vote in that party's primary election - but voters can change their party registration on primary Election Day or any time leading up to it. In other words, it is essentially an open primary."

Wyoming is not unique in this area, though other states with ostensibly "closed" primaries may have different deadlines for party-switching. The folks who concern themselves with "Open or closed primary??!11??" or "ALL PRIMARIES SHOULD BE CLOAZED!!" may as well finally begin to understand that the bolded part above applies to every state now. There is effectively no such thing as a closed primary anymore, anywhere.

In this particular case, the lack of a truly closed primary isn't going to save Cheney's RINO ass no matter how much she goes around desperately begging for the votes of liberals of both parties. In other states however, Democrat infiltration of Republican primaries has had significant effects even if those effects did not always alter the outcome.

Tags:

U.S. House Wyoming 2022 Liz Cheney Dead RINO J6 Kangaroo Kourt Klown


8/1/2022: [Michigan] Moderate GOP Rep. Peter Meijer Trashes Dems for Bankrolling His MAGA Foe in Scathing Op-Ed: Selling Out 'Any Pretense of Principle' [MSN]

The article claims that "Democrats have been financially backing MAGA GOP candidates this primary cycle in order to have a better shot at beating them ahead of an expected Republican wave in November." In this case, that assertion smells like bullshit. As of July 13 Gibbs had less than $150,000 cash on hand and Meijer had about 6x as much. Those must be some pretty stingy Democrat contributors.

Two facts:

1. If (more likely when) Gibbs defeats Meijer on Tuesday, he really better count on Democrats for further funding because the petulant spiteful RNC sure ain't gonna come across. They would much rather lose this seat than support a conservative who just slaughtered one of their pet RINOs.

2. This district was moved a few notches to the left in redistricting so now any Republican starts off as the underdog in a general election. Especially when the ultra-liberal Democrat in the race has all the money in the world to campaign with and doesn't even have to spend a dime of it in the primary because she's unopposed.

The district is not so far left that a Republican can't possibly win, and money alone doesn't always determine the outcome of a race, but when the imbalance is as massive as this one will be it's going to take a substantial blue wave to pull off the upset here.

Tags:

U.S. House Michigan 2022 Silver-spoon RINO Peter Meijer Going down


7/28/2022: Cruz endorses Kleefisch, putting him at odds with Trump in Wisconsin's GOP gubernatorial primary [Fox News]


Photo credit: AP Photo/John Raoux

Liberal media outlets like Fox News aren't about to bypass a chance to stir up trouble for Republicans, but this endorsement -- Trump's, not Cruz's -- is a valid concern. Is Kleefisch really an inferior candidate to Michels, who is currently shown as doing worse in the general election vs. Evers than Kleefisch is? The ex-Lt. Governor under Scott Walker isn't some squishy "moderate"; she is every bit as conservative -- or more -- as the other candidates who are running and, as the linked article notes, has actually been elected to something before.

So let's see: Kleefisch is not only conservative and "electable" (and well-enough funded, AND opposed by liberal establishment Republicans like the "Club For Growth") but actually more likely to win an important race than the novice whose only political experience up to now has been losing races for state Senate and U.S. Senate. But of course Trump is never wrong with his endorsements (Dr. Oz says "hi") and in this case Trump is needlessly snubbing a good MAGA conservative who has thoroughly supported him for years.

Tags:

Wisconsin Governor 2022 Rebecca Kleefisch Ted Cruz Got it right Donald Trump Didn't


7/27/2022: [Michigan] GOP's Meijer voted to impeach Trump. Now Democrats are helping his Trump-backed GOP primary opponent [Washington Post]

Even better, true conservatives are supporting Gibbs too. The liberals and RINOs are both hoping that Gibbs will lose in November against the ultra-liberal and very well-funded Rat. The redistricting process also worked against Republicans here, as this district which encompasses the rapidly-deteriorating Grand Rapids area was shifted several points to the left and now favors Democrats.

Even so, at least one poll shows that Gibbs would fare much better than the spoiled little rich boy who voted for impeachment. However this will take money, and Gibbs doesn't have a family fortune to fall back on, nor can he count on funding from big-$$$$ RINO GOP donors after he wins the primary next week.

Gibbs is going to be outspent heavily while his opponent gets 24/7 free support from the media. Despite all that, he can and will win if RINO voters in his district are able to suppress their disgust at one of their own kind losing his primary. We're told by the GOP establishment (when it suits them) that party unity in general elections is of paramount importance. Let's see how well they prove it in this case.

Tags:

U.S. House Michigan 2022 RINO backstabber Loser