Last week’s National Journal poll of political bloggers asked for an estimate of House Democratic losses in the 2010 election. While the answers are reported in clusters of 10, the median estimate for the Left appears to about 20 seats. The median on the Right was in the mid-30s. I estimated 38, adding “Could be less if the congressional leadership and Obama correct their course, but they do not seem inclined to do so.”
Question 2 asked the Left if Democrats would benefit politically from another televised Q&A session by President Obama with House Republicans. Seventy-eight percent of the Left expected Democrats to benefit. Right-leaning bloggers were asked if Republicans would benefit, and 57 percent said yes. I was in the majority: “All Americans would benefit. All Republicans are Americans. Ergo, Republicans would benefit. The metric of success should not be partisan benefit, but rather national benefit.”
Dave N. says:
I am predicting Republican gains in the 30-40 seat range in the House, and 4-6 seats in the Senate. To me, the interesting trifecta on the Senate side will be whether Republicans can defeat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and take both the President’s and Vice President’s former Senate seats.
Delaware looks to be a “goner” already with Mike Castle the likely winner (frankly, Beau Biden NOT running this year is probably very smart politically, since I will bet that Castle, once elected, will not seek re-election in 2014, when he will be 74).
Nevada looks to be pretty bad for the Democrats as well, with Reid running 10 points behind second-tier Republican opponents.
Finally, the Democrats shot themselves in the foot in Illinois, with a less than sterling nominee for Obama’s former seat and the strongest possible Republican with his party’s nomination.
Of the three, Illinois is the one most likely to remain Democratic, but Republican Mark Kirk is currently up 6 points.
Stay tuned. The ride will be interesting.
February 8, 2010, 2:00 amorca says:
Republican over-confidence has served the Dems well in the last two election…why should the next one be any different?
February 8, 2010, 2:12 amDave N. says:
Orca,
Did you have fun at Senator Coakley’s inauguration? I realize it was after Governor Deeds’ in Virginia and well after Governor Corzine’s re-election gala in New Jersey.
Of course, you are the one who predicted sunshine and lollipops and Democratic gains this year in an earlier thread. I suspect in 9 months you won’t be eating your words — rather, you will just disappear and pretend they were never spoken.
February 8, 2010, 2:46 amorca says:
Yep, and that was before the economy grew at a 5.7% clip and unemployment dipped below 10%, too.
February 8, 2010, 2:58 amEricPWJohnson says:
The house is in play everytime Pelosi opens her mouth.
Bayh, Boxer, Biden, Feingold, Murray are now seeing some troubling drops in poll numbers. Republicans are seeing a rise across the board in their poll numbers.
It seems that more and more “news” is being announced everyday – since the election is about to go into overdrive in 60 days – the window for a democrat correction is fading fast.
If Obama keeps digging in his heels invariably the senate will graduate progressively into play as well – its a stretch – but then again it was a stretch that broke perfectly for the Dems two years ago as well
February 8, 2010, 3:11 amorca says:
IIRC, two years ago you guys were predicting Obmam could never win Florida because McCain was going to get 40+% of the Jewish American vote…
February 8, 2010, 3:39 ameyesay says:
David Kopel wrote,
Regardless of Mr. Kopel’s views on “correctness,” if Congress passes health care reform along the lines of the non-identical bills already passed by the House and Senate, this will help Democrats in November.
Regardless of Mr. Kopel’s views on “correctness,” if Congress reverts the inheritance tax situation to that of 2009 — a $3.5 million exemption per person, $7 million per couple, Republicans will try to make noise about it, but it will not hurt the Democrats in November.
February 8, 2010, 4:31 amEricPWJohnson says:
eyesay
People loved Clinton – people admired his wife – they slapped them down – LBJ was WORSHIPPED – he lost his first primary in a landslide over medicare
Bush passed a prescription drug program that actually slowed the avalanch of Medicaid part B (hospitalization expenses) and was mostly funded by the private sector = an entire political party was demonized for overspending despite the fact the economy roared from 2004-2007
I guess what those pesky voters are actually saying is – enough government -
February 8, 2010, 5:53 amEricPWJohnson says:
Orca
I never predict votes especially jewish votes – because – I dont have a clue – but I can read and I can see that all Democrats are seeing drops in their polling numbers – all of them – some are very small – some are very significant.
you can boast – point out errors that others have made – I just made the comment that people dont like Pelosi – (her family was voted out in Maryland so maybe its genetic) and she’s running unopposed – for now
If Obama continues on a path that is causing a very strong voter reaction – its not our fault – its his
February 8, 2010, 6:08 amJim W says:
No one is fooled by the “unemployment going down” news. We all know that it’s just people who have given up hope and stopped looking. We know this because so many of us know multiple people who are out of work or in bottom of the barrel jobs and we don’t see hiring going on. The “real numbers” are probably up in the 20 percent range.
If you lump in graduates living in their parent’s basement and people who have decided to get another degree instead of sitting at home, it’s probably even higher.
February 8, 2010, 6:52 amA. Zarkov says:
That 4Q growth was mostly inventory investment, which is the lowest quality growth. To be specific, 3.39 points were due to inventory investment. Why is this a problem? The uptick is followed by a down tick in the next quarter. Also bear in mind these numbers usually get revised because the government still uses that terrible X-11 code to do the calculations which doesn’t do the seasonal adjustment part right.
On the unemployment number. A lot of this is hiring for the 2010 Census. Those jobs go away. We cannot get optimistic or pessimistic about the economy until a clear pattern emerges after several quarters. You are trying to make predictions on what might be noise.
February 8, 2010, 7:01 amBloggers estimate Dem House losses. Agree that more Obama question times would be good | Liberal Whoppers says:
[...] more: Bloggers estimate Dem House losses. Agree that more Obama question times would be good [...]
February 8, 2010, 7:16 amPersonFromPorlock says:
The problem with a ‘Question Time’ is that it presumes politicians have something useful to say. Given the pols we have, how could Question Time ever be anything except ‘gotcha!’ and ‘no ya don’t!’, all played to the gallery as melodrama?
February 8, 2010, 8:02 amall night says:
hahahaha. zarkov will be here all night, fellas. i wonder if he also thinks acorn is the one moving the employment numbers single handedly.
Tru dat. And if Dems lose handily come Nov, blame goes to them for wimping out on the stimulus package. Truly stupid, even as a political move, considering that they knew that the major thing voters would judge them on would be the employment situation. They have 3-4 months for this to turn around, considering that there is usually a significant delay in when voters will consider the economy to have turned around from when it actually happens.
February 8, 2010, 8:44 amPeteP says:
ObamaTV – The problem is the format. If the Repubs are stupid enough to allow the same format as last time ( Obama at the podium on stage, everyone else in the inferior position of being seated at a lower level ), the visuals establish him as dominant, and make him look powerful and ‘in control’ and therefore ‘leaderly’ before he even starts reading the TOTUS.
No way should they allow any such format that gives Obama ‘instant superior position’.
February 8, 2010, 8:56 amB.D. says:
The question was who benefits politically.
February 8, 2010, 9:27 amyankee says:
“Course correction” is unlikely to have a significant impact regardless of which direction you think is “correct.” The election is overwhelmingly likely to be determined by structural factors in the form of the economy. A miraculous turnaround that slashes unemployment will help Obama and very little else will make a significant difference. The only other thing I can think of is a terrorist attack (possibly) producing a “rally round the flag” effect.
February 8, 2010, 10:07 amDjDiverDan says:
Amen to that! The last time around, the Republicans (including my own Congressman, Jeb [No, Barack, it's not 'Jim'] Hensarling) spent their time making political speeches, and Obama responded with his own political speeches. I’m not sure either party is capable of actually engaging the other in a genuine discussion of the substance – Democrats distrust the Republicans, and assume they are all greedy fatcats, while Republicans distrust Democrats and assume they are all either evil socialists or clueless utopians. If anyone really wants to make a try at meaningful dialogue, the LAST place this is likely to happen is a public forum, where BOTH sides will do nothing but demagogue for the benefit of their constituents.
February 8, 2010, 10:45 amTamerlane says:
orca: You might enjoy reading Eric Hoffer’s The True Believer. It is all about YOU.
February 8, 2010, 10:58 amLarryA says:
I’ve been looking for a job for over a year, and every time I take someone a resume it goes on a big stack. On the order of one employer said she’s getting a hundred applications for jobs that three years ago would get four or five. This in a small town in Texas, where things aren’t really that bad. We are seeing lots of folks applying who live 70 miles away in San Antonio.
So far the Census folks are the only ones who are really interviewing, and since I aced the first test they asked me back for the supervisor test. Given their hiring goals they’ll be one of the top two or three employers in the county for about three months.
If nothing else shows up I’ll have to go for early Social Security, as a lot of folks I know have done, so the unemployment rate will drop a bit from that.
It won’t change my vote in November, though.
February 8, 2010, 11:12 ambyomtov says:
ObamaTV — The problem is the format. If the Repubs are stupid enough to allow the same format as last time
Oh right. It was the format that mattered, not the fact that Obama tore the GOP a new a$$hole, without a teleprompter. He didn’t have the answers written on his hand, either.
I notice they don’t want TV coverage any more. Wonder why?
February 8, 2010, 11:18 amB.D. says:
“Question Time” is inappropriate in our system, IMO. Obama isn’t a prime minister. The presidency is, in part, a ceremonial and symbolic position. He demeans himself and his office the more he occupies the same space as representatives and senators. These are people who go to townhalls and get shouted at.
Obama should use formal channels of communication to deal with Congress. Forget the endless speechifying; his veto is the loudest bullhorn he owns.
February 8, 2010, 11:33 amorca says:
With President McCain in the White House and the Republican’s 41-59 majority in the Senate, I should just accept another Republican triumph in Novemeber is inevitable?
February 8, 2010, 11:45 amMartyA says:
I’ve long believed that Obama’s refusal to release so many of his personal records was because they proved that he was no where near as bright as his propagandists would have us believe. The fact that he only reads words that others have written for his teleprompter added to my belief.
February 8, 2010, 11:51 amBut, I thought he handled himself pretty well at the Republican Q & A. Therefore, I see no reason to give him a platform in future that makes him look as good as Palin. Obama does, however, like to make stuff up. If the captive media would do a lie check (as AP did after the SOTU address) after each “question time” it would be great but isn’t likely to happen.
Why should any American do anything to mitigate gravity’s influence on Obama? The Republicans will only get blame from question time; they can gain nothing, NOTHING from Obama’s pretense at bipartisanship.
And, before I agreed to participating, I’d demand a token of good faith. I’d want Reid, Pelosi and Gibbs replaced, RIGHT NOW!
uh_clem says:
We are slowly crawling out of the Bush recession. The question is whether we’ll be far enough out of it by November for voters to credit Obama, or whether things improve slowly enough that voters blame Obama for not fixing the problem fast enough.
Job losses per month peaked at 800,000 at the end of the Bush Administration, and have declined steadily until today’s marginal-positive rate. This graph illustrates it rather succinctly:
http://tinyurl.com/yk3nlu7
If the economy is back on track, Dem losses will be minor (there is almost always some in an off year election). If not, the GOP will make substantial gains. Just be careful about rooting too hard for failure….
February 8, 2010, 11:54 amB.D. says:
Your chart shows improving fortunes well before any of Obama’s policies went into effect. So are you saying Bush’s policies began leading us out of the recession?
February 8, 2010, 11:57 amTamerlane says:
One of us is confused. I thought this thread was about the current election cycle, not the last one.
February 8, 2010, 12:06 pmbobc says:
This makes me sad. When dumb people are extremely partisan it does not bother me. There are enough on both sides to cancel out. However, you are a smart person. You would choose a tactical solution (deny further Q and A sessions because of the risk of losing) over what I am sure is something you would normally describe as healthy in a democracy (politcal discourse). It is tragedy of the commons. If all parties engage in perfect play to maximize their benefit, a republic may not work.
February 8, 2010, 12:20 pmAnonsters says:
I object to this characterization.
Harry Reid losing is, in fact, good for Democrats.
February 8, 2010, 12:27 pmRPT says:
But what does the palmreader in chief say?
February 8, 2010, 12:34 pmAnonsters says:
You should watch Prime Minister’s Question Time. The questions are always scripted, and always meant to be “gotcha” moments, but it’s quite entertaining all the same.
February 8, 2010, 12:34 pmNot My Leg says:
I have literally no idea what this is supposed to mean. Before you agreed to participate in question time with the head of the executive you would demand removal of elected legislators? You know that Pelosi and Reid don’t serve at the pleasure of the president, right?
February 8, 2010, 12:35 pmAnonsters says:
I think you meant President Brown.
February 8, 2010, 12:37 pmAnonsters says:
LOL. Are you Sarcastro in disguise?
February 8, 2010, 12:37 pmAnonsters says:
We don’t know. He hasn’t had the chance to look deeply into Putin’s eyes and see his soul lately.
February 8, 2010, 12:38 pmyankee says:
I can’t speak for uh_clem, but the TARP bailout, though extremely unpopular, was vital to ensuring that things got worse more slowly. And TARP was indeed a Bush policy.
February 8, 2010, 12:49 pmAnonsters says:
I. Can’t. Resist.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v144/SenorHugo/tarp.jpg
February 8, 2010, 12:51 pmRPT says:
Ahem. You must have confused Gov. (the answer is in my hand) Palin with someone else.
February 8, 2010, 1:07 pmA. Zarkov says:
Given your experience does it bother you that the H1-B program is still bringing in people to compete with Americans for middle class jobs? Why do we need this program during a period of high unemployment? There are no shortages of workers, yet the program remains in force under the fiction that we have shortages.
February 8, 2010, 1:09 pmPersonFromPorlock says:
Well, OK, that Question Time is a waste too. Politicians, like children, should be robustly discouraged from thinking of themselves as ‘entertaining’.
February 8, 2010, 1:40 pmAnonsters says:
Spoil sport.
February 8, 2010, 3:24 pmAdam J says:
A. Zarkov – Um, the number of H-1B visas are capped at 65,000- are you really worried about a program that increases your competition by .05%?
February 8, 2010, 3:34 pmmariner says:
And that’s assuming that the Obama administration hasn’t fudged the numbers, and also that the media are properly reporting them.
Just as they told us the truth about Obama himself, John Edwards and Global Warming — to pick just a few high-profile examples.
February 8, 2010, 6:52 pmA. Zarkov says:
How do you get that number? If the number is so trivial then how come industry lobbies so hard to raise the cap? Let’s remember the denominator of the fraction needs to the number of new jobs being offered not the total number of people working in the field. Moreover, the total of H1-B people currently working is much larger than the yearly cap. If we sent them all home there would be hundreds of thousands of jobs opened up for Americans.
February 8, 2010, 6:56 pmRuss says:
The Republicans pick up six in the Senate(NV, DE, AR, CO, ND, PA), with another two possible but unlikely(CA and IL). And they likely pick up 35-45 in the House, and control is possible.
However, the best thing, politically, that could happen to the Republicans would be to pick up enough seats in the Senate to gum up the works and enough in the House to make noise, but not enough to take control. That way, for 2012, when a helluva lot more democrat Senate seats are up for grabs, the Republicans can still claim everything wrong in DC is the fault of the democrats.
Not saying anything about the ethics of such things, just that such an event would be the best to set the Republicans stage for 2012.
February 8, 2010, 7:47 pmMichael B says:
“… Obama question times would be good”
Answer times, absent guile and his ex cathedra pronouncements and assurances, would be better still.
February 8, 2010, 8:43 pmDan L says:
There used to be “question time” in the United States. When the press was doing its job, it was called a “press conference.”
February 8, 2010, 11:43 pm1040 says:
<blockquote cite="comment-746748
A. Zarkov: Given your experience does it bother you that the H1-B program is still bringing in people to compete with Americans for middle class jobs?
Finally, the promise of bipartisanship rings anew! Good to see that Obama’s protectionist, borderline xenophobic rhetoric and position on this matter finds ardent support in a far-right conservative as yourself.
February 9, 2010, 12:38 am1040 says:
I assume you expect them to continue paying for the mortgages on their homes while they’re in the galleys of a cargo ship bound back to India?
February 9, 2010, 12:41 amA. Zarkov says:
Since the H1-B is a non-immigrant visa with a finite time limit why anyone lend to such a person? Why would such a person get into a mortgage in the first place? Evidently you don’t know much about this kind of visa.
February 9, 2010, 11:41 am1040 says:
Just so I am clear: you are making the claim that people on H1-Bs are (a) ineligible for mortgages, and (b) do not own homes? Ok then :)
February 9, 2010, 3:01 pmA. Zarkov says:
I never said either. I said that officially they are not immigrants and their term of employment expires. That’s why the H1-B is called a non-immigrant visa. Even non-resident foreigners can buy US property if they want.
You claim there are large numbers of such H1-B holding mortgages and if they left they would default on their mortgages. I say that’s not credible because someone here temporarily has little incentive to purchase property.
February 9, 2010, 3:57 pm1040 says:
Let me first note that you amended your statement from the fact that bank owners do not lend to h1bs to the variant that there are not “large” numbers of h1bs who own a house.
Second, I will point out that you are wrong, especially given the widespread reporting about how even large numbers of illegal immigrants were given mortgages during the banks’ free credit spree. Por ejemplo. There are, in fact, large numbers of h1bs who own mortgages, something I know both from personal and professional information.
February 9, 2010, 7:55 pmA. Zarkov says:
I did not say banks don’t lend to H1-B people. I asked why would they want to?
H1-B is not the same as an illegal immigrant. Illegals intend to stay. H1-B are temporary.
How many? Give me a number. Then you have to tell me how many H1-B who go home default on their mortgages. They could rent or sell. You said we would face huge numbers of H1-B mortgage holders defaulting if we ended the program.
How about the Americans who lost their jobs to H1-B replacements and went into foreclosure because of a job loss. Are you counting those people?
What with you and the H1-B? Are you one?
February 10, 2010, 12:03 ammarkm says:
If there are a lot of H1B’s putting mortgages on houses, then there are a lot of fools with H1B visas. Only a fool buys a house based on a temporary job.
Why would banks lend to them? From a quick skim through 1040′s google search, apparently they nearly always got a 20% downpayment (even if the H1B borrowed the money elsewhere), which wasn’t very common with loans to citizens. Then they’d get a few years of payments, and finally they’d get the house when the H1B was sent back home. Until the market crashed, that was a heck of a deal. Now, it might not be so good, but they may be assuming that so much air has been let out of prices already that they can’t get much lower. Or maybe it’s just their only chance to unload a repossessed house – sure it will be coming back, but for a while they’ll be making money on it instead of paying for maintenance and taxes.
February 10, 2010, 6:10 pmpmk says:
What’s with you and the xenophobia? Are you one of the incompetents that lost their job to an H1B who could do the same or higher quality work for less?
February 10, 2010, 10:50 pmpmk says:
Wow. They seem more responsible than citizens. Maybe we should send some of our citizens away and have H1B’s instead.
February 10, 2010, 10:51 pm