Republican Are Facing Divisive Primaries

[steven johnson]

Everyone is trying to figure out how the 2010 midterm elections are going to turn out. Nate Silver said the GOP has a one-quarter to one-third chance of taking back the House. His key is, "Congressional elections are not all about the economy. Rather, they’re all about the president. The correlation between the president’s Gallup approval rating immediately prior to the midterms and his party’s performance has been very strong...There is also a lesson here for the president: Use your bully pulpit to its full advantage. This, indeed, is a lesson that Obama should already have taken to heart...My statistical model shows that Obama will need to sustain an approval rating in the range of 65 percent to avoid losing any ground in the House."

http://www.esquire.com/features/data/obama-mid-terms-033009#ixzz0SEIWHBLv

http://northshoreexponent.wordpress.com/2009/08/14/netroots-activists-admit-that-2010-could-be-a-rough-mid-term-election/

The RNC in Washington is trying, in some states, to pick the front runners for the 2010 congressional race. This is creating an 'insider-outsider' split in the candidates.

President Obama’s 57% job approval rating is similar to what President Ronald Reagan’s was at this point in his first term (53 percent). The key questions is which message will take hold with the swing voters: anti-incumbent sentiment, or a persistent distrust of the Republican Party on almost every key issue?

The New York Times poll from 9/24 noted: "Most Americans trust Mr. Obama more than Republicans to make the right decisions on the issue; 76 percent said Republicans had not even laid out a clear health care plan....Just 30 percent said they had a favorable view of Republicans in Congress. By contrast, 47 percent said they had a favorable view of Congressional Democrats."

And on the Afghanistan isue, more than 50 percent said the war was going badly.

In Poll, Public Wary of Obama on War and Health

Republican pros are ratcheting down expectations of a large GOP Congressional win in 2010 like it did in 1994. They bet it will be closer to 1982 when Ronald Reagan lost about 26 House seats.

GOP Pollsters: Democrats Won't Lose Big in Midterm Elections

Time will tell.

In New Hampshire, Florida, Colorado and other states, the push by Republicans in Washington to identify preferred Senate candidates has stirred resentment and touched off competition from those not impressed by the Washington seal of approval.

But the pushback on national Republicans is striking because it comes at a time when many in the party believe the political environment is rapidly improving for them and after party strategists were initially keen on the early effort to single out Senate choices.Yet in Florida, former House Speaker Marco Rubio has refused to abandon his quest for the Republican Senate nomination despite the National Republican Senatorial Committee’s quick blessing of the candidacy of Gov. Charlie Crist. And the perception that the national party was going to meddle in the Colorado primary on behalf of Jane Norton, the former lieutenant governor, upset folks there.

To some, the resistance is an extension of the grass-roots distrust of the government that was on vivid display during town hall meetings this summer and at the recent conservative protest on the National Mall. Though much of the antipathy was aimed at Democrats, there is unhappiness with Republicans at the national level as well, with home-grown conservatives citing them as part of the overall problem.

“During the post ’08 hangover there were some in the establishment who thought our way back was to moderate our message,” Mr. Rubio said in an interview. “The arguments that were used to justify an endorsement in a primary all look silly now.”


Republican Are Facing Divisive Primaries

[LiberalFighter]

1. 2010 won't be the same as 1994 or 1982.

1982 and 1994 didn't have any element similar to the Teabaggers and what appears to be fierce competition in the primaries.

There are other major differences between that time period and now that will effect the outcome. The internet has become more of a resource in news and information. IMO if the internet was not at the stage it is now the election in 2008 would had been much closer. McCain and Palin would not had been examined as closely. Obama would not been able to get his message out to as many voters. It is possible that if the resources were at the same level in 2000 Bush would not had been elected or appointed.

[Socialism]

4. Internet

I believe this health care "reform" bill is the death stroke of the democratic party.

[PhD]

2. I'll believe it when I see it

Based on what I've seen of the Tea Party types in my town, I think the majority will unite behind Republicans come election time.

[Socialism]

3. Polls

And you actually Believe those poll numbers? How can you expect the New York Times, which is a liberal news paper to be unbiased when it does polling about issues? YOu cant trust Gallup, New York Times or any other mainstream media polling apparatus.

[jerryster]

5. Actually, the Senate could be a problem.

Here's a link to a Nate Silver post about the Seante elections.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/03/democrats-now-project-to-hold-average.html