Saturday, October 30, 2010
2010 Election Preview and Predictions
DEMCAD (Reginald Kaigler)
First, these elections will change nothing. And this article is more about entertainment than politics. The Republican and Democratic Party are two wings on the same bird.
Anyway, Real Clear Politics is reporting "Seats Continue to Move to GOP; Avg Gain 65, Tossup Range 45-85." And judging by the number of surging Republican candidates in both the House and Senate, I think we're going to have a GOP gain of at least 60 seats in the House and 8 in the Senate. Actually, I'm starting to think that the Republicans can get 9 or 10 seats in the Senate. I think we'll see a 50-50 Senate. Joe Biden will be the tie breaker. Don't forget, I'll be tweeting on election night. Follow me on Twitter.
So what's going to happen after the elections?
The GOP will engage in grandstanding, but fail to reverse Obamacare. They would need 60 votes in the Senate to get anything done. And the GOP is more likely to stall until they get more votes in 2012 and retake the White House. They are not going to risk pissing people off by cutting entitlements, cutting the spending, ending the corporate-driven wars or defaulting on the debt. But the good news is that Obama's ability to harm the nation will be limited.
I see CO, IL, NV and PA will going red.
WA and CA will stay blue.
WV Senate is all over the place. Democratic Governor Joe Manchin is in danger of losing in WV, but his popularity makes me believe that he'll prevail. However, this state did support McCain by a healthy margin.
NEVADA (Sharron Angle v. Harry Reid)
Angle is pulling ahead of Reid. He's far too unpopular to be re-elected to anything. Plus, McCain will have Angle win more Independents. History will be made and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will lose his seat.
GOP MONEY WOMEN
Newsweek produced an amusing article entitled, "These Moneywomen Might Have Too Much Baggage: Why aren’t voters warming to these three self-financed candidates?" Of course, this article is referring to Carly Fiorina, Meg Whitman and Linda McMahon. All of which are running for the U.S. Senate (or Governor) with an enormous amount of personal funds to drive their campaigns. Meg Whitman, former eBay CEO and executive for The Walt Disney Company, is trailing her Democratic opponent. Carly Fiorina, former CEO of HP and executive at AT&T, is trailing. McMahon, former CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment, is down by double digits. Whitman has sent 141 million dollars of her own money trying to become the Governor of California.
So why are they struggling? Simply put, they're not very good candidates. Let's start with Meg Whitman. She was busted hiring an illegal immigrant for housekeeping. Whitman isn't particularly likable or appealing.
Carly Fiorina isn't running a very good campaign. Boxer has done a fabulous (yes, I'm using that word) job of portraying Fiorina as incompetent and anti-working class.
Keep in mind that both of these candidates are running in liberal California. So the deck is stacked against them. They needed to distinguish themselves as credible and able to implement a meaningful economic plan. And so far, they have failed. McMahon never had a prayer in CT. It's more blue than a Michigan teacher's Union.
All three women lacked the appeal that would draw voters in (Sarah Palin definitely has this), the type of personality that would allow them to make a connection with the voters and a coherent campaign and a clear economic plan. Whitman has the best chance to win, but I predict that all three with lose.
The Tea Party will do better than most analysts expected. However, half of the members are just using the label to win their races and the other half will be marginalized in Washington. Yeah, I know. I'm a cynical bastard.
Christine O'Donnell however is very likable, but her credibility has been damaged by a number of incidents in her past. The polls show her closing, but in a blue state like Delaware, GOP candidates must do better than her campaign.
What are your predictions?