If Christie runs he could win the nomination and the Presidency

One thing is for sure: if Chris Christie runs it will be the end of Mitt Romney. Mitt has always been the moderate's choice in the race but the big man from Jersey would overtake him easily. Christie has some baggage (including a large waistline) but he'll be seen by a lot of moderates and some conservatives as a strong leader who can really challenge Obama in the general election.

I believe Christie would actually have an easier time winning the general election than the Republican nomination. If he wins the nomination he puts all the swing states in play (see previous posts) and even a few blue states. If he ran the table in the general election and won the swing states, Christie could end up with an Electoral College vote in the high 300s, easily capturing the Presidency.

This is all assuming he's running. I thought Mitch Daniels and Paul Ryan would run so I'm used to being wrong. Right now in Trenton Governor Christie and his team and considering how to put together a last minute strategy to get on the ballot in several states (like Florida) that have moved up their primaries. We should know by Friday if he's running. Many in the GOP are not at all satisfied with the current crop of candidates and a lot of pressure is being put on the Governor Christie to run. Simply put, the GOP doesn't want to lose an election to a President who is so obviously vulnerable and Chris Christie may be the answer they are looking for. While he may not be Ronald Reagan, he'll be able put together a coalition based on strong leadership that would be very hard to beat.

Sincerely,

The Snitch

A Republican will be elected tomorrow in West Virginia

Bill Maloney, the Republican candidate for governor of West Virginia, will defeat Democrat Earl Ray Tomblin in the state's special election tomorrow. I predict Maloney will win 51.5% to 48.5% after being down by as many as 30 points earlier this year. President Obama's approval rating is in the high 20s in the state and any Democrat will suffer because of that large albatross. Six weeks ago Tomblin was ahead by more than 15 points but has seen the race become a dead heat in the last 5 days. Most of late breaking voters are deciding to vote for Maloney, which only makes sense as political independents in the state simply can't stand the national Democratic party right now.

Having said that, Tomblin does have a solid chance of pulling out a win. The Democrats do have a substantial registration edge and control the State Assembly and Senate (and have controlled it since the 1930s). There have only been 2 Republicans elected to the governorship in the state since the Great Depression so it is only natural to think the Democrats have home field advantage. However, George Bush won the state twice and John McCain was victorious in 2008 so Republicans can win statewide and I believe they'll win tomorrow.

Sincerely,

The Snitch

A huge change in the Presidential race may be happening in Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania hasn't voted for a GOP Presidential candidate since 1988. With the exception of only two states (Maine and Nebraska), all states have a "winner takes all" rule in giving its Presidential Electors to the person who gets the most votes in his state. For example, Al Gore won the state of Wisconsin by approximately 5,000 votes in 2000 but was granted all ten Electors from the state instead of five or six he may have gotten for splitting the vote.

Article II Section I of the Constitution gives each state broad latitude in how it chooses its Electors, so Pennsylvania's prospective change will almost certainly survive any court challenge (if it comes to that). Right now there are eighteen Electoral votes in Pennsylvania (2 Senate seats and 16 House seats) and what will probably happen under a new plan will be each candidate will be awarded all the congressional districts he carries, and, if he gets the most votes in the entire state, he'll get the two other Senate Electoral votes as well. This has huge implications: even if Obama were to carry the state in 2012 it is very likely he would lose at least ten of the congressional districts which would grant the GOP candidate ten Electoral Votes. Obama's will be overwhelmingly strong in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh but he'd lose in most of the rest of the state which would account for his actually winning less Electoral votes than his GOP opponent.

If you assume 206 Electoral votes are certain for the GOP and 60 more are leaning in the GOP's direction, they would only need four more to win the needed 270-they would come from Pennsylvania.

Sincerely,

The Snitch

Look for two big GOP wins tomorrow

Look for a big win by the GOP tomorrow in the special election in New York's Ninth Congressional District, vacated by Anthony Weiner who resigned in June after an exploding sex scandal doomed a once very powerful liberal Democrat. The district has not gone Republican since the 1920s but dissatisfaction with the President in domestic policy as well as his apparent anti-Israel positions in a district that has a high percentage of observant Jews has put the seat in play. Democratic politicians have crossed the aisle to support Bob Turner, a Catholic businessman who is the GOP's choice to run and is getting the overwhelming support of political independents in the district. Tomorrow in NY CD 9 you'll see the following result:
Bob Turner (R) 51%
David Weprin (D) 42%
Others 8%

In Nevada CD 2, Republican Mark Amodei will crush Democrat Kate Marshall in tomorrow's special election in this traditionally GOP district. The seat covers most of Nevada except the area around Las Vegas and is reliably conservative. Marshall looked to have a shot a few weeks ago (actually the Democrats tried to have the Secretary of State declare a "winner takes all election" without a primary to split the GOP vote among Republican rivals but was shot down by the courts which demanded a primary for both parties) but now looks like she'll get hammered tomorrow. Her attacks on Amodei, saying he'll "take away Medicare" don't seem to be resonating and he'll cruise to victory. I believe he'll win by 17 points tomorrow.

The New York election is particularly important as it shows the President's weakness with political independents. In 2008 he won 52% of the Independent vote but is not polling more than 38% of that block now. In some polling in NY CD9 he's getting less than 30% support within this all-important voting cohort. If Turner cruises to victory tomorrow in a district that hasn't voted for a Republican congressman in eighty years, alarm bells should go off all over Washington.


Respectfully,

The Snitch

The latest Electoral College Count

Right now the President's national approval rating is hovering right around 40%. That's always a bit deceptive in that the 2012 election is state by state contest where his approval rating can vary greatly. It really doesn't matter that Obama is under 50% in New York, odds are he's going to win there next November. And it doesn't matter that his approval rating is around 25% in Oklahoma; he's not going to even come close in the Sooner State.

It is much more important that his number is around 50% in states like Iowa, Wisconsin, Florida and Virginia (to name a few). There are really nine states that will decide this election: Florida, Ohio, Virginia, Colorado, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Virginia. Of the states he won in 2008 two of them (Indiana and North Carolina) are already out of reach. He can afford to lose Virginia and Florida as well but he has to win most of the rest to be reelected. There's almost no chance he can pick up states he lost to John McCain in 2008 so he must create a "firewall" of states that will get him to 270 Electoral Votes.

Right now I think it is very likely (if the election were held today) he'd probably lose Virginia, Florida and Ohio. If that happened the Republican candidate (now probably Rick Perry) could win without winning any other states. Obama will certainly concentrate a lot of effort in those three states knowing that if he can win at least one of them he'll have a puncher's chance of winning by an eyelash.

He's got another problem: there are several other states that he won in 2008 that are in danger of falling into the GOP column. The biggest one in Pennsylvania. The Keystone State has not voted Republican since 1988 but Obama's numbers are terrible there. If he loses here it really doesn't matter-he loses the election. At the same time he'll have to hold on to Colorado, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and Wisconsin which will not be an easy task. If the GOP cracks this part of the firewall the Republicans will place one of their own in the White House in 2012.

Here's a look at the current vote count:

Safe Republican (24 states, 206 EVs)
Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming

Leaning Republican (3 states, 60 EVs)
Florida, Ohio, Virginia

Even (6 states, 55 EVs)
Colorado, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin

Leaning Democrat (5 states, 42 EVs)
Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, Oregon

Safe Democrat (12 states and the District of Columbia, 175 EVs)
California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, District of Columbia

The President clearly has a high bar to meet to be reelected. It will be tough but it can be done. The Independents that no longer support him are not coming back any time soon so we'll see what he does in the coming weeks and months to try to stabilize his approval rating and salvage his Presidency.

Sincerely,

The Snitch

The Presidential race changes and may change again

Rick Perry's entrance into the GOP Presidential primary will certainly shake up the race. Right now only Perry and Mitt Romney have a shot at securing the nomination. While my friends at Powerline blog think Romney will win the nomination I completely disagree. Perry will probably win or come close in Iowa (he was Agriculture Comissioner in Texas and he's an evangelical) and that will siphon Michele Bachmann's votes. Certainly Romney wins in New Hampshire but Perry will crush him in South Carolina by at least ten and probably fifteen points.

I don't know if pictures showing Perry wearing a pistol while he jogs will resonate with soccer moms (probably not) but he can claim his state created more jobs than all the others combined in the last ten years. In a time when 3,000,000 less people are working than when Obama took office that will be a powerful talking point. He will certainly run an aggressive campaign (unlike John McCain). He's won five times in Texas statewide and is a proven fundraiser and bareknuckle brawler. Just last year he crushed Kay Bailey Hutchinson in the GOP primary for Governor. Up to that time KBH was the most popular politician in Texas and Perry came from behind to beat her by 21 points.

Certainly a national election is not like Texas and he'll take a beating from the media which will do everything it can to paint him as an extremist in the hope that they can help reelect the President. Being from Texas in 2012 is probably a drawback as this century has already had a Texan be President and that albatross will hang over his head. There are also terrible rumors of his private life that are floating out of Travis County. If there is substance to the rumors his candidacy will almost certainly be finished.

In the end I don't think Perry, Romney or Obama will win the Presidential election of 2012. I believe by Labor Day Paul Ryan will jump in and will create a stampede that will crush his rivals and pose a serious challenge to the President. In the next post I'll look at the Electoral College problem the President faces next year.

Sincerely,

The Snitch

Thoughts on the Wisconsin recalls

Despite spending around twenty million dollars to recall six Republican State Senators, the Democrats (or more precisely their union and PAC allies) came up short in last Tuesday's elections. Two seats did switch: Dan Kapanke lost in LaCrosse in a district that is probably around D+5 and Randy Hopper of Fond du Lac lost. His district is at least R+3 but he had severe personal problems came up two percent short. The Democrats thought he was particularly vulnerable as he had won his first term in 2008 by just 200 votes. Luther Olsen of Ripon survived with 52% and Alberta Darling, a particular target for the Democrats, won with 54% of the vote. We won't know for a while but estimates are that three million dollars was spent against her. That's simply an amazing sum that's several times the average. She's close to the governor and she is the Chairperson of the Finance Committee. If the Democrats could have knocked off Olsen or Darling they'd control the chamber but it simply wasn't meant to be.

Next week there will be two Democrats on the recall ballot: Jim Holperin in the northeast section of Wisconsin and Robert Wirch, who sits in a district in the far southeastern part of the state. In my opinion, Holperin is very vulnerable. He squeaked by in 2008 to win his first term but he's facing an aggressive GOP challnger. There haven't been many polls on the races so it is hard to know where they stand. I do expect a poll or two to be released Monday.

If anything, these elections show the raw power of the unions and especially of organizations like the ProgressNow network, which is a sixteen member liberal umbrella organization funded by unions and megarich liberals. They poured everything they had into these recalls. How can they spend so much money legally? As long as they don't cooperate with the campaigns of the respective candidates they can pretty much do whatever they want. Wisconsin was saturated with commercials, mailings, and paid workers who flooded the state. The President is planning to raise 1 billion dollars for his campaign next year. Unions will fund about 400 million and will expect a large return politically. The automatic deducations of union workers (especially public sector workers) fund a robust Demcoratic machine that can renew itself every month as more donations pour in. In states like Wisconsin, public workers can now choose to withhold their donations which can do great damage to the Democrats effort in 2012 and beyond. As union dues dry up their influence will continue to wane. That explains part of the great hysteria in Madison; many intrinsically knew that union power and their symbiosis with the Democratic Party was on the line.

This election was to serve as a warning for any GOP or other public officials who wanted to take on the unions. Instead, it has heartened conservatives that they can win elections even when they are outspent (in this case probably around 2 to 1) and in a purple state (like Wisconsin). 89% of Americans are not in unions and, in the end, I believe their hysterical tactics they used in Madison along with consistently negative advertising proved to be their undoing. The GOP was energized and fought back hard; they put in a lot of resources and squeaked by with a victory just as they had in the April Supreme Court election.

Ironically, the issue that set the recalls going was never mentioned in the campaign advertisements. Governor Walker's bid to end collective barganing was not mentioned, only allusions to how he had "cut the education budget." There was also a lot of time spent on senior scare tactics as each GOP State Senator apparently wanted to "end Medicare as we know it," whatever that means (that will be a preview of next year's Presidential campaign). It really shows that collective barganing is a losing issue. The people it motivates aren't going to vote Republican anyway and political independents don't have the work protections that union people do and for the most part pay a lot more for their insurance and pensions and so the issue doesn't resonate with them.

Perhaps the funniest thing about this whole mess is that Wisconsin's budget is now in surplus and several school districts are not going to have to fire teachers because they are not as constrained by collective bargaining. As this trend continues and more people see the success of the Governor's plan he'll end up gtting at least partial credit for what he pushed through and put everything on the line for. While very vulnerable next year he won't go down without a fight and the Democrats should think long and hard about trying to recall him and face the prospect of him winning yet again.

One last thought; who is to blame for the end of collective barganing in Wisconsin? Is it Scott Walker? The GOP legislature? The answer is Barack Obama-the biggest union ally in the history of the Presidency. Had he not overreached and gone so far to the left in the first two years of his Presidency GOP gains would have not been so great at the national and state levels. And, if he somehow gets himself reelected, collective bargaining will be dead for several cycles in Wisconsin and other states as GOP majorities in many stathouses will endure for years to come.

In the end, Wisconsin had a choice to be like Illinois or Indiana. Illinois is in a state of political and economic chaos. The public pension system is terribly underfunded (in Cook County alone there are over 100 billion of unfunded liabilities) and taxation is very high. Indiana on the other hand, is solvent and growing. Even though it was very painful politically, Wisconsin has chosen to be Indiana and hopefully will continue to grow and proper in the years to come.

Sincerely,

The Snitch