|
|
|
Nation
“Oh no they didn't” is Daniel Denvir's weekly blog post on last week's state politics. Philadelphians know precious little about the legislature or governor, but pretending that Tom Corbett doesn't exist will not make him go away. Follow on Twitter @DanielDenvir.
Pennsylvania's new law requiring voters to present ID at the polls is, critics say, a solution in search of a problem — and one that could needlessly suppress the votes of hundreds of thousands of Pennsylvanians, disproportionately impacting students and the poor, black and elderly (i.e. Democrats).
And so right-wing state Rep. Daryl Metcalfe was thrilled by Republican Philadelphia City Commissioner Al Schmidt's new report on voting irregularities, declaring that it “finally confirms what leading Democrat opponents of voter photo ID and those in the mainstream media have been denying all along. … Philadelphia is without question one of our nation’s most infested epicenters for rampant election fraud and corruption.”
Seven Republicans who want to take on Democratic Senator Bob Casey faced off at a debate at the Pennsylvania Society, the annual confab that brings the state's major political and economic power brokers to New York for schmoozing, cocktails and a really fancy banquet dinner. This event has been in New York for a century, and has been criticized for not bringing the big-spending to, say, Scranton, Philadelphia, Erie or Pittsburgh and for its general lobbyist-industrial complex decadence.
Montgomery County Sen. Stewart J. Greenleaf has announced that he will seek the Republican nomination for president. Yes, of the United States of America. He joins a few dozen other randoms, alongside the dozen “serious” candidates (44 candidates total!) that round out a Republican field that is already mighty difficult to take seriously.
Though Greenleaf, who has zero name recognition outside the state, acknowledges that he has absolutely no chance of becoming the Republican nominee, he seems to betray — nay, broadcast — an equally narcissistic ambition. Something is missing from the current debate, according to his statement, that only he, a humble public servant, can add:
“Seeking the office of the President isn’t Greenleaf’s goal. Greenleaf seeks to add to the debate in New Hampshire and stimulate a real and robust discussion on eliminating our national debt and making it unconstitutional for future Presidents and Congresses to pass unbalanced budgets in the future.”
So where, exactly, does Mr. Greenleaf get off? Here’s the curious thing: according to Terry Madonna, Director of the Center for Politics and Public Affairs at Franklin & Marshall College and a ubiquitous commenter on state politics, Greenleaf has never been much of a showboat.
Yeah, it happened: Corbett. Toomey. Rand Paul. Rick Scott, the Medicare defrauder who, somehow, became governor of a state full of old people. Speaker John Boehner in tears of orange-hued joy. The largest Republican majority in a half-century, probably the most ideologically conservative House since the New Deal, if not longer. Liberals aghast. Democrats in disarray. Obama's agenda eviscerated. Mitch McConnell declaring that the GOP's No. 1 goal these next two years is to — not help the economy — but make sure Obama is a one-termer. Many liberal activists are already convinced that will be the case.
Oh the humanity.
Now, everybody take a deep breath, and chill out.
Yeah, it was a big election, a big pendulum swing, a reckoning, if you want to call it that. And for all of the caterwauling and Monday-morning quarterbacking, it was basically inevitable, for one big reason, and a bunch of lesser ones.
The big reason: The economy. When the economy sucks, the in-party loses. For all the hubbub about health care, or the deficit, or whatever, this is and will continue to be the single largest determinant in prognosticating elections. Add to it the facts that the Dems had picked up a lot of red-state districts the last couple years — meaning a lot of vulnerable Blue Dogs — and that its not at all uncommon for the president's party to suffer big losses in mid-terms, and this cake was baked months ago.
The Republicans also benefited from, essentially, disengaging themselves from any actual governance these last two years: They fought everything, no matter how obvious or necessary, even if the ideas the president pushed came from Republicans or were backed by scientists or economics, and when facts didn't suit their case, they simply made shit up (see âdeath panelsâ). The political genius of not having a stake in things — and by, in fact, gumming up the works by opposing both the stimulus and other Dem efforts at job creation under the auspice of fiscal responsibility — is that they knew that, given the enormity of the problem, the economy wouldn't bounce back before 2010, and the president's party would take the blame.
In a general sense, the Republicans capitalized on anxiety, rather than their own policies: According to various exit polls, even this GOP-skewed electorate favors letting the tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent expire and is split on health care reform. In perhaps the most logically incongruent stat of the day, among those who blame Wall Street for the economy, 56 percent voted for the Republicans who uniformly opposed Wall Street reform. It's less a mandate, and more a win by default.
That's not to say campaigns don't matter: The GOP outperformed expectations a little.
Republicans, however, did somewhat better than you might expect based on having won the national house ballot by 6-7 points. There are various formulas that attempt to translate the generic ballot or the House popular vote into a seat count without worrying about how things work out at a district-by-district level. Those formulas would generally translate a 6-7 point popular vote win into something like a 50 or 55 seat gain for Republicans. Instead, it looks like Republicans will net something on the order of 65 seats. The Republican vote was evidently concentrated in a way that was quite efficient.
Conversely, were it not for candidates like Christine O'Donnell, Ken Buck and Sharron Angle, the Democrats may well have lost, or come closer to losing, the Senate. (The Republicans came closer than they should have to losing in Pennsylvania, which I'll get to in a minute.) That's something for Republicans to keep in mind while nominating presidential candidates: Congressional districts, at least in part because of how they're typically gerrymandered, are more generous to far-right candidates than are more heterogenous statewide races. There's a better-than-average shot that whoever the GOP nominates in 2012 will lose, anyway — more on that in a minute, too — but this is doubly so if the candidate is ideologically closer to Jim DeMint than, say, Mitt Romney.
Another factor: Elections are determined by who shows up. Enthusiasm gap aside, here's why the Republicans did well:
 |
Old people comprised a huge voting bloc; young people didn't. These over-65 voters helped shoot down that pot initiative in California, for instance. The overall demographic, especially in the Rust Belt, where the Dems got hammered, was also considerably more white than in 2008. As a rule, white, old people lean Republican. Even more so in times of social upheaval: That's why the GOP's attacks on the health care bill were so effective; the legislation was presented as an alteration of the fundamentals of America itself. You also saw this echoed in Republican opposition to illegal immigration, which in at least some cases took on an overtly racist component, and to a lesser degree in the right wing charges that Obama is a Marxist, Kenyan, socialist, Muslim, whatever. When big change happens, there is always a reaction; in this case, and not surprisingly at all, it was a move toward authoritarianism. The Republicans benefited from that — it rallied the troops and drove out their base.
I won't delve much into the billions — with a b — of dollars big corporations pumped in to races all over the country after that Citizens United ruling, mainly because I haven't seen anyone really quantify the effect yet (though I'm sure it will be a topic of discussion at APSA forums all over the country next year). But I can't help but imagine that allowing big corporations to throw around massive amounts of money from anonymous donors with no accountability or transparency didn't matter. After all, if money didn't affect anything, these companies wouldn't be spending it.
The oft-discussed enthusiasm gap mattered, as well, at least in the sense that Dems didn't get the turnout they needed. But to some degree or another, this is, again, not unexpected: A lot of core Dem groups — the young, minorities — don't vote at very high rates in off-years. Philly's turnout yesterday was a dismal 29 percent.* (UPDATE: This early figure is incorrect. The correct figure is 40.18 percent.). And that's why you have Senator Toomey, who had Philly been around 40 50 percent, would have almost certainly lost. (Philly has about 1.1 million registered voters: half would be 550,000. If the 84-16 split held, that would be another 115,000 or so votes for Sestak, if my back-of-napkin math is correct. Sestak lost the statewide race by a bit shy of 80,000 votes.)
Check out these maps of the gov and senate races:
 |
| philly.com |
 |
| philly.com |
Sestak and Onorato won Philadelphia by huge numbers; but not enough of us showed up to offset the Republicanism of the T and this state's rural areas. So, Toomey eked out a victory that, in any other year, he probably wouldn't have. He'll be up for reelection during a presidential election, in 2016; he barely won, even in the biggest Republican wave since Truman. My money has him as a one-termer.
So what's the takeaway: Simply, if the economy improves, Obama will be reelected. From the estimable political scientist/forecaster Alan Abramowitz:
 |
| Alan Abramowitz, PS: Political Science and Politics, October 2008 |
In short, if the economy is growing by at least 3 percent in the second quarter of 2012 — and the resiliency of the American economy over the years implies that this is likely — history suggests that Obama is an odds-on favorite, no matter his opponent. There are a few exceptions: 1968, during Vietnam; 1976, after Watergate; 1992, when the economy was actually doing relatively OK, but people thought things were going poorly, and the incumbent president seemed out of touch (and also, without going too far afield, it's very difficult for any party to win four consecutive presidential elections). What's more, even if the economy doesn't rebound, the president will have what will likely be a do-nothing Congress to run against, and the probability that whoever he runs against will have to get the blessing of the Tea Party to win the nomination, which means he'll have a foil in the way he doesn't have now.
The economy is and will remain the biggest predictor, but predictions of his demise are, to say the least, premature.
Long post short: This wasn't a sea change. This was a the natural aftermath of a down economy, and a Democratic base that didn't bother to vote, while white conservatives and the elderly voted in droves. A reaction is warranted: The prez has to deal with a Speaker Boehner, and a very conservative GOP caucus. But the Democrats still control the Senate and the White House, so a stalemate is more likely than anything else (unless the Republicans decide to take at least some ownership of the problems they helped create under George W. Bush, which doesn't seem likely). That's unfortunate, given the times, but it is what it is. From Andrew Sullivan's blog:
Republicans may be claiming the latest vote was against big spending and deficits. But the GOP relied so heavily on votes from the elderly that it suggests what really upset these voters was $500bn in Medicare cuts over 10 years, and more than $1 trillion in the next 10. Anyone looking at the long term projections for spending knows that the main worry is Medicare, and this is the number one issue in any serious attempt to curb the deficit.
That Obama was willing to take on this issue says a lot for his courage and responsibility that few are giving him credit for. Of course Obama's proposals didn't go anywhere near far enough, but he seems to have breached the limits of what is politically possible in addressing the number one spending problem (and taxes too, simply by returning only the very rich to Clinton-era levels). Republicans have gotten away with a nonsense, that the government should pay for whatever health care the elderly want, but that either raising taxes to pay for it, or restrictions on how the money is spent, would threaten freedom. This is madness, and makes a budget crisis look inevitable.
And despite voters' impressions, the 111th Congress was very productive. Very productive, indeed.
Great stuff, I actually do feel a bit better, thanks!
A decent analysis Billman...it IS the economy stupid! We've been sold "jobs saved" for two years, a nebulous intangible concept that is virtually impossible to prove..."jobs created" are real tangible things which after a trillion dollar stimulus and chronic 10 percent unemployment are virtually nowhere to be found. The GOP will probably keep a low profile and let Obama and Biden flail around with the "jobs saved" bullshit until the turds are voted out and we get some real leaders and managers.
Didn't the Inquirer say that turnout in Philly was at 40%? "Philly's turnout yesterday was a dismal 29 percent. And that's why you have Senator Toomey, who had Philly been around 40 percent, would have almost certainly lost." Toomey still won.
Anon, I saw that last night. The 29 percent number came from something Committee of Seventy sent out election night. Those numbers may have been wrong/revised since then. I'll check into it and see if there's an official tally. In the meantime, the point is, improve Philly's turnout by a few percentage points, and Sestak would have won.
[...] A smart blogger put an intriguing blog post on The Post-Mortem: Everybody, chill out (UPDATED) :: The Clog …Here’s a quick excerpt [...]
Because, why the hell not.
Of course, we're not really going to bet, because that would be illegal. But, I am going to give you my predictions as to Tuesday's elections, and in the comments, you tell me how wrong I am and what's really gonna happen, and then on Wednesday, we'll compare notes. Cool?
To help you out, here are a few good polling and analysis sites, so we're all cribbing off the same cheat sheets:
Pollster.com (now owned by Huffington Post)
All right, let's do this (and bear in mind, this is what I think will happen, not what I want to happen):
House of Representatives: 239-196, Republicans control. This would mean a pickup of of 59 seats, a massive GOP win; more so than most of the pollsters forecast. Locally, all of the Republicans in tight races — Gerlach, Meehan, Fitzpatrick — pull it out; Meehan, Gerlach and Fitzgerald with 4-to-6 point wins (think 52/53-48/47). Over in the Jerz, I gotta go with Adler over Runyan, but barely. John Boehner will be the speaker of the House, and by the time the next presidential election rolls around, he'll be a little less popular than Gingrinch was in 1999.
U.S. Senate: 52-48, Democrats control. This would mean a net pickup of 7 Republican seats: Arkansas, North Dakota, Illinois, Wisconsin, Nevada, Colorado, Indiana, and, yes, Pennsylvania. Much as I loath to say it, I have to go with Toomey, and probably larger than the polling indicates: 55-45. Joe Manchin will hold on, albeit barely, in West Virginia; and Chris Coons will embarrass Christine O'Donnell, 58-42. Cali, Washington, Oregon and Connecticut will remain blue, and Chuck Schumer of New York will be your next majority leader.
Oh, and Corbett will be our next gov. 58-42.
The comments are all yours. Fire away.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by blogs of the world, Philly News Now. Philly News Now said: Let's bet: Soliciting your Election Day predictions.: Because, why the hell not. Of course, we're not really goin... http://bit.ly/9s5rIK [...]
Your fright Toomey cover from a few days ago was PATHETIC. Unprofessional.
 |
| Courtesy of Zimbio |
Former Prez Bill Clinton and President Barack Obama will visit Temple University this week for get-out-the-vote rallies. Sadly, though, they won't do so at the same time: Clinton will be there tomorrow at 8 p.m. at Temple Beach the Bell Tower. And Obama will be at the Student Pavilion on Saturday at 10 a.m. (click here to RSVP).
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Philly City Paper, andrew mendelson, Tim Quirino, CB Realty Corp, Tara Broadway and others. Tara Broadway said: Presidents Obama and Clinton to visit Temple this week: http://ow.ly/30rFl.. If someone pays me 1 Million Ill streak during it...lol [...]
[...] Stand With Christine O’Donnell On Halloween That TimeSet Your Subway Traffic Sensors To BorkedBoth Obama and Clinton will be on the Temple campus tomorrow (at different times), both of them essentially paraphrasing the following graphic: This entry was [...]
 |
Not that I would ever submit myself to the late-night torture known as The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, but some people, masochists and old folks, I presume, still do, and apparently, Chris Rock went on there at some point and made a funny about Michael Vick's dog situation: âWhat the hell did Michael Vick do? Pitbulls ain't even real dogs! Dogs have never been good to black people!â
Problem for Rock: He was in the running to play the legendary Richard Pryor in a biopic on the late comedian's life. Pryor's widow, however, is a dog lover, and she didn't take well to Rock's comments:
In an open letter to the star, Jennifer [Pryor] fumes, âFor your information, Chris, what Michael Vick did was to torture, drown, electrocute and murder dogs all for fun and for profit! He went to prison for felony animal cruelty! That's what he did! These types of comments only encourage abuse and misunderstanding of this breed, as well as actual dog-fighting. Clearly this part of your latest stand-up routine would not make Richard laugh!â
Now, the Interwebs tell us, Marlon Wayans will be taking over the lead role, which means, based on our experience with Marlan Wayans films, well ⦠I mean, can we trust the brain behind White Chicks and Scary Movie 4 to do justice to Richard Fucking Pryor? Ugh.
Mike Vick is ballin this season! Eagles win super bowl XLV!
Rock got what he deserved and so did Leno, his ratings DROPPED. I guess people just don't like dog killers, uh? LOL
The headline reads like Michael Vick punched someone in the tooth who happened be a key person in the decision making process. Wow. Just wow. I think the man has been suffiiciently demonized, but you can, apparently, never have too much demonization, especially around Halloween.
Marlon was really good in Requiem for a Dream, has Chris Rock ever played a role that dramatic? I've only seen Chris Rock in comedies. For what it's worth, I saw the first Scary Movie on Comedy Central the other day and genuinely enjoyed it. It still holds up.
I don't care how Michael Vick plays. Look at that dog! Chris Rock - that's not really funny. Too bad he didn't do more research before making that "joke."
I was just thinking that Requiem is a masterpiece and I have always wondered why he didn't do more dramatic roles like that. Being Pryor seems to be a great role both ends of the spectrum happy and tragic we know he is funny and also has shown he can be amazing in drama. Break a leg Marlon. I never loved or hated CR but now I hope he feels this sting for a long time. Hope Marlon wins an Academy Award for this and Rock has to just watch.
 |
*Can't see the map all that well? Click here. |
It's other people's problem. Specifically, Asia's problem. And then east Africa's problem. And then Central America's. I can't help but think if it was the U.S. and Western Europe lit up in purple, maybe we'd be a bit more serious about curbing our greenhouse gas emissions.
How is "risk" defined on this map? Does this have to do with historical and projected temperature increases? I would imagine that our shade of green is at least partly due to the work that has been done so far., and the darker areas are newly industrialized countries that need to know the full effects of their activities.
 |
| pollster.com |
|
*A graph of polling trends, sans R-leaning Rasmussen. Play with the graph yourself here. |
 |
On Twitter, AmericablogGay makes a prescient point about today's Don't Ask, Don't Tell ruling:
Log Cabin is defending our civ rts and Obama is opposing them. Is the Dem party failing to miss the import of this?
Indeed, the Log Cabin Republicans pressed this case, while the Obama DOJ opposed them, even as the president's own efforts to legislatively revoke this entrenched discrimination stymied in Congress. The DOJ has already signaled its opposition to the type of nationwide injunction handed down today, and has 60 days to appeal.
Perhaps there's some merit to the DOJ's position — that it is duty-bound to enforce the law, no matter how stupid or backward it is — but, quite frankly, I just don't care anymore. Truman, by executive order, desegregated the military at a time when that was about the single least popular thing he could have done. That took courage. Today, with polls showing majoritarian support for ending DADT and the midterms right around the corner, this court just lobbed a giant softball over Obama's plate; all he has to do to do the right thing is, well, nothing. Just let the ruling stand, whether or not Congress takes action in a lame duck session, or, well, never.
Not quite courage, but at least, the right result.
- ActiVman
- adventures
- Arts
- Ask A Man-About-Town
- Award Tour
- Awards
- Bad Idea Factory
- Beer
- Below the Curve
- Bikes
- Booze
- Brian Hickey
- BRT
- Budget
- Budget Fuss
- Business
- Casinos
- City Council
- City Hall
- CouncilMANIC
- CP Abroad
- CP in the Community
- Criminal Justice System
- Day Tripper
- Death and Taxes
- Delaware River
- Design
- DROP
- Drugs
- Dubious Distinction
- Elections
- End of Days
- Environment
- Fashion
- Film Fest
- Financial Meltdown
- FrackTrack
- Free Library
- Gambling
- Gay Stuff
- Get Lit
- Greenstorming
- guns
- Hall Monitor
- Health
- Health Care
- Hello, Kitty
- Holidays
- Ice Cubes
- Iggles
- Immigration
- In Memoriam
- Labor
- Lawsuits
- Letters
- LGBTQ
- Maps
- Marcellus Shale
- Media
- MMA
- Mummers
- Music
- MUST READ
- Mysterious Mysteries
- Nation
- News
- Non Sequitur
- Opinion
- PA politics 2010
- Parking Wars
- Parks and Recreation
- People Send Us This Stuff
- Philadelphia Police
- Philadelphia Union
- Philaphemera
- Philly From Scratch
- philly madness
- Photos
- Poverty
- PPA
- President Obama
- Print Edition
- Prisons
- Protest
- Readers Write
- Real Estate
- Rock Bottom
- Schools
- Science
- Screwing Philly
- SEPTA
- snow
- So Lush
- Soccer
- Sporting Life
- Sports Complex
- State Politicians
- State Politics
- Street Art
- Strike
- Stuff We Like
- Taxes
- Taxi Drivers
- Tech Fetish
- television
- The Budget Crisis
- The City Paper
- The CLOG
- The Human Condition
- The Mayor
- The Phightin Phils
- The World
- Things that make you go hm
- Tinfoil Hats Off
- Under the Table
- Under the Tables
- Urban Development
- Urban Planning
- urban wildlife
- Video Poker
- We Call Shenanigans
- Weather
- Web Junk
- Weekend Omnibus
- White House
- What We've Found
- Women's Issues
- Flyered Up!
- How 'Bout That Weather?
- it's always sunny in philadelphia
- Stu!
- Shopping
- get out
- 10-track mind
- ArtsFlash
- Bloggity
- Bruce Being Bruce
- Colleges
- Comedy
- Gigantic Surprises
- Hello Canary
- Hello Puppy
- errata
- get lost
- Inside The Fishbowl
- Library Closings
- Local Support
- Movies
- Murder
- Night Moves
- Recycling
- radio
- Scientology
- Sex
- Sixers
- Skeeze Police
- State Politicians Screwing Philly
- That's a cool stencil!
- Theater
- Things We See
- This Week
- This Week in Oates
- University City
- WIN
- What we don't heart
- trailer!
- what we heart
- Feeling Guilty
- Askadelphia.
- Broke in Philly
- Contest
- Dance
- Dear Paper Doll
- Do A Good Thing
- Education
- Film Fest Schism
- G20-20 Vision
- Goodbye
- Gossip
- Great American Heroes
- PATCO
- Pearl Jam Week
- Puppy
- Stars of the Photostream
- sustainability
- Lower Merion Webcam-Gate
- The Cycle
- Equality Forum
- Bureaucrat of the Week
- Animals
- ElectionEar
- Photostream
