Analysis Of The Three Big Races Today: New Jersey, Virginia, & New York.

For Advertising Info, Write.
rwnews@blogads.com

Premium Left blogad

Left Blog Ad

Permalinks

Analysis Of The Three Big Races Today: New Jersey, Virginia, & New York.

Written By : John Hawkins

New Jersey

In the New Jersey Governor’s race, it’s a three way fight between incumbent Democrat Jon Corzine, Republican Chris Christie, and Independent Chris Daggett.

New Jersey has been a heartbreaking state for Republicans because time after time, in race after race, the GOP candidates have started off strong only to be swamped by the Democrats at the end of the race.

Further complicating matters in this race, Independent Chris Daggett is draining off support for Christie.

Looking at the polling numbers, what you find is that Corzine is consistently polling in the 40-43% range while Daggett is polling at roughly 10%. That means Corzine’s top number is probably somewhere between 43% and 46% of the electorate. In a two way race, he would be dead meat.

But, it’s not a two way race. The 24,000 dollar question is whether Daggett’s voters are going to continue to stick with him or whether they’re going to decide it’s futile and then peel off to vote for Christie.

Were I a gambling man, I’d bet enough of voters move from Daggett to Christie to put him over the top.

Analysis: Slight Edge to Chris Christie: 60% chance of a victory and a Republican takeover.

Virginia

Democrat Bob McDonnell (R) vs. Creigh Deeds (D) are going at it for the governorship. Virginia’s current governor is a Democrat and Obama handily won the state; so you’d think this would be an easy win for the Dems.

However, it’s a Republican year and Creigh Deeds has run a terrible campaign. McDonnell has been ahead of Deeds in every poll since June. In the last 11 polls, McDonnell has been ahead by double digits. He should win in a walk.

Analysis: Likely Republican takeover. (90/10) that McDonnell wins.

New York — 23rd district

In a special election for John McHugh’s seat, the Constitution Party’s Doug Hoffman is taking on Democrat Bill Owens. The “Republican” Dede Scozzafava has left the race and has endorsed the Democrat, but her name still remains on the ballot. Complicating matters further, it sounds as if Owens will have a better ground game in place, but in a low-turnout election, Hoffman’s supporters seem likely to be more energized.

So, how will it all shake out? There have only been two polls since Scozzafava left the race. PPP has Hoffman up by 17. Sienna has him up by 5 points. Additionally Owens has yet to break 36% in a poll.

Analysis: (75/25%) chance that Hoffman wins. That means it’s leaning towards a Constitution Party takeover of the district.

Robert_Ingersoll

With New York 23rd you might have won the battle and lost the war. When Gigrich and Palin come out on opposing sides of the issue you have the beginnings of a split in the party.
http://guardian.blogdrive.com/ CavalierX

News flash, Robert: the party has been split for years. It's only now that the Conservatives are coming to the forefront again. The Republicans will either join us, or wither away and die. Or join the Democrats, where so many of them actually belong. At least we'll have a little honesty in the party divisions.
Corperate_Cabana

Seeing the ascendancy of Conservatism like this mirrored what Newt Gingrich had done years before: the Washington RINOs and the Democrats had to go in 1994.

It's repeating itself, only this time Sarah Palin has become that icon replacing the Washington RINO Gingrich as the one showing the RINOs and the Democrats out the door.

It's not a split of the party when its people, its base, its membership as a whole, have spoken, just as it is in the opposite, where the Democratic base told President Obama to throw their candidates under the bus.
http://www.comics.com/editoons/asay/ Zheldon

It is a split in the party. A split between those running the party and the party's base.
Mike_M

"When Gigrich and Palin come out on opposing sides of the issue you have the beginnings of a split in the party."

Which equals a big fat problem for liberals when the conservative wins anyways.

The era of big government is over, bob. Either through conservative dismantling or liberal spending that triggers hyperinflation and collapse.

Conservatives as the Doers and Deciders intend to be the ones to pick up the pieces. You liberals can go on forever waiting for the next handout that will never come.
D-Vega

Damn, mike you must've been practicing your kool-aid sound-bites. Keep in mind government grew considerbly over the past 35 years, more so under Republican Presidents. Especially Ronaldus Maximus.
TheBaud

Keep in mind government grew considerbly over the past 35 years, more so under Republican Presidents. Especially Ronaldus Maximus.

Posted by D-Vega 2009-11-03 12:22:18

Yeah, good thing we had House Speaker 'Tip' O'Neill to keep things in check.

Oh, what a minute…
Bill_Dalasio

That means it’s leaning towards a Constitution party takeover of the district.

Actually, Mr. Hawkins, Hoffman is running as a member of the Conservative Party, not the Constitution Party. The Conservative Party is a different animal. It is specific to NY, in response to the liberalism of the Rockefeller wing of the Republicans dominant in the state's Republican Party.
whats_up

Posted by TheBaud

2009-11-03 12:25:19

Is this somehow supposed to excuse Reagan and his economics. Also for all those all it takes is to cut taxes crowd. The real growth under Reagan in terms of the economy occured after he had raised taxes, not cut them.
D-Vega

Of course, though they would never call Reagan a liberal, he acted like a traditional Democrat in office. He was a former Democrat from California after all.
TheBaud

Posted by whats_up 2009-11-03 12:29:52

Tip O'Neill call every one of Reagan's submitted budgets "DOA – Dead on Arrival". Funny how it is always a Republican President responsible for spending, never a Democrat one. BTW, 'little bitch', since you have a Democrat President AND a Democrat Congress, who are you going to blame for the current economic issues?
Mike_M

"Keep in mind government grew considerbly over the past 35 years, more so under Republican Presidents. Especially Ronaldus Maximus."

Yeah back then we had the greatest military the world had ever seen to keep our enemies in check.

Now we have Hillary Clinton with her "overcharge" button because Obama blew $1.2 trillion filling in potholes and screwing in toxic Chinese CFL bulbs.
D-Vega

Yeah back then we had the greatest military the world had ever seen to keep our enemies in check.

We had that before Reagan was in office.
RWNReader2

Is this somehow supposed to excuse Reagan

Yes, because Reagan never had a Republican controlled congress. In fact, no Republican President has EVER had a Republican controlled congress (since before WWII) prior to W in 2006 (and he blew it with earmarks). Yet almost EVERY SINGLE Democrat has enjoyed one-party rule for at least part of his term – we are currently in our sixth period of Democrat one-party rule in less than 60 years. The result: as you point out, government keeps getting bigger and bigger.

p.s. the smallest one-party congressional margin of the 6 was more than twice as large as the miniscule margin W had in 2006.
Mike_M

"We had that before Reagan was in office."

Yeah, and we did after until Clinton gutted it. Now our troops get hung out to dry by Obama the Undecider because he's funneling 60% of the entire Federal budget into welfare payments.
Bildo

Posted by D-Vega

2009-11-03 12:45:02

"We had that before Reagan was in office."

No, the Left had weakened it so badly that the Soviets had no reservations in illegally invading Afghanistan, and we couldn't even stage a simple hostage rescue without our men crashing in the desert due to lack of training.

Oh, and Reagan was a Democrat back when Democrats had values. He switched when the party abandoned those values in favor of destructive populist goals.

"Democracy is worth dying for, because it's the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man." – R.R.

"Freedom prospers when religion is vibrant and the rule of law under God is acknowledged." – R.R.

and the one most relevant to the healthcare debate:

"Government does not solve problems; it subsidizes them." – R.R.

Yeah, I can see how you might think Reagan was Liberal…
whats_up

Yeah, I can see how you might think Reagan was Liberal…

Posted by Bildo

2009-11-03 13:07:17

By all means, list those "conservative" things that you think Reagan did while in office.
whats_up

Posted by RWNReader2

2009-11-03 12:45:09

You got your years wrong, Bush had his Republican controlled Congress from 02-06.
Bill_Dalasio

We had that before Reagan was in office.

I dunno, Vega. I seem to recall something about helicopters crashing in the desert and the U.S. being held up by Iran…
Bill_Dalasio

Keep in mind government grew considerbly over the past 35 years, more so under Republican Presidents. Especially Ronaldus Maximus.

Well, given that the rate of growth of spending as a percentage of GDP slowed under Reagan, you must have a high idiosycratic definition of especially
Bill_Dalasio

The real growth under Reagan in terms of the economy occured after he had raised taxes, not cut them.

An excellent counterpoint. Except that it is completely, verifiably false. The recovery started in 1983 (on the late side). The tax hikes you reference didn't even get enacted until 1986, taking effect later.
whats_up

An excellent counterpoint. Except that it is completely, verifiably false. The recovery started in 1983 (on the late side). The tax hikes you reference didn't even get enacted until 1986, taking effect later.

Posted by Bill_Dalasio

2009-11-03 13:34:40

Bill,

Not true, Reagan raised taxes four times between 1982 and 1984. In 1982 Reagan enacted the largest tax increase since WW2, raising $100 billion over three years, mostly through restoring 13 of the reductions that he had passed the year previous. In 1983 he raised the tax on gasoline. 1984 he raised another $50 billion through closing tax loopholes on corporations, raising their tax obligation.
whats_up

Posted by Bill_Dalasio

2009-11-03 13:32:12

Reagan added more than 60,000 workers to the Federal payroll, he bailed out Social Security and increased the national debt higher than all previous presidents combined.
http://annoyedelephants.wordpress.com 5minutes

Actually, Mr. Hawkins, Hoffman is running as a member of the Conservative Party, not the Constitution Party. The Conservative Party is a different animal. It is specific to NY, in response to the liberalism of the Rockefeller wing of the Republicans dominant in the state's Republican Party.

Just wanted to re-emphasize what's already been posted. Hoffman has no relation to the Constitution Party.
RWNReader2

You got your years wrong,

you are right, 2006 was the year he lost it, not the year it began. Though it is instructive that liberal bias is so pervasive that a 51 to 49 Senate ('02 – '04) is counted as "Republican controlled" for the purposes of blaming Republicans, while repeated veto/filibuster proof Democratic majorities (including now) doesn't stop liberals from blaming Republicans for the abject failure of Democratic rule.
D-Vega

Man, you guys don't accept any blame or responsibility for anything.
RWNReader2

he bailed out Social Security

So you acknowledge that the Democrat's preferred 'solution' of simply kicking the can down the road – as they screamed when W tried to implement actual change, is the wrong thing to do.
Living_Right_in_CA

Man, you guys don't accept any blame or responsibility for anything.

Posted by D-Vega

2009-11-03 14:16:26

Pot meet Kettle times 1000..
http://TheNixonTape.Blogspot.Com Dick_Nixon

- $3.4 million for a 13-foot tunnel for turtles and other wildlife attempting to cross U.S. 27 in Lake Jackson, Fla.

- $1.15 million to install a guardrail for a persistently dry lake bed in Guymon, Okla.

- $9.38 million to renovate a century-old train depot in Lancaster County, Pa., that has not been used for three decades.

- $2.5 million in stimulus checks sent to the deceased.

- $6 million for a snow-making facility in Duluth, Minn.

- $173,834 to weatherize eight pickup trucks in Madison County, Ill.

- $20,000 for a fish sperm freezer at the Gavins Point National Fish Hatchery in South Dakota.

- $380,000 to spay and neuter pets in Wichita, Kan.

From Ace of Spades HQ, Things that Barak Obama spent your taxpayer money on this year.
TheBaud

Man, you guys don't accept any blame or responsibility for anything.

Posted by D-Vega 2009-11-03 14:16:26

That is easily the funniest and most ironic thing I have ever seen you post, D-Vega. Congratulations for taking your hypocrisy to the next level!
RWNReader2

Man, you guys don't accept any blame or responsibility for anything.

'We' have never had anything approaching the kind of absolute iron-fisted control of every facet of government and media that your side routinely has, including right now. Yet you blame 'republican obstruction.' Nevertheless, every time we have a Republican in the White House, we have no problem taking responsibility for keeping your pansy-ungratefull-ass safe from foreign attack, while your messiah dithers on 'it-don't-matter' political campaigns in Virginia, New Jersey and New York, and plays golf, but doesn't have time to even discuss an ongoing American war effort.
Living_Right_in_CA

Hey D-Vega which President last had 60 seats in the Senate (from his party)? Were you happy with those years?
D-Vega

'We' have never had anything approaching the kind of absolute iron-fisted control of every facet of government and media that your side routinely has, including right now.

That is always the excuse, but do you ever ask yourself why?
http://TheNixonTape.Blogspot.Com Dick_Nixon

That is always the excuse,

Why are Democrats blaming Republicans for being unable to pass their agenda on health care and utility bill raising?
Bill_Dalasio

In 1982 Reagan enacted the largest tax increase since WW2, raising $100 billion over three years, mostly through restoring 13 of the reductions that he had passed the year previous.

Leaving 2/3 of the reductions in effect.

1984 he raised another $50 billion through closing tax loopholes on corporations, raising their tax obligation.

Removing loopholes hardly counts as a tax hike. A resonable assessment is a calculation of marginal rates.

Reagan added more than 60,000 workers to the Federal payroll

An increase of 60,000 workers on the federal payroll over eight years is hardly a surge.
RWNReader2

but do you ever ask yourself why?

The answer, as I have stated here over and over again, is that the Democratic party is a morally bankrupt confederation of special interests that stands for nothing but power. What do 'gay rights' or minority rights have to do with unions, or high taxes, or socialism? The answer is nothing, except that these groups can be lurred by the serpent into accepting the forbidden fruit by playing to narrow selfish interests. I'll gladly trade the morally upright position of advocating for what's right, even if it means that the forces of darkness will enjoy greater majorities, because moral-bankruptcy = failure, even when you're in control, just as we are currently witnessing with Obama. The hope of course, is that America will one day permit the good guys a chance to right the wrongs of your wretched bretheren.
http://TheNixonTape.Blogspot.Com Dick_Nixon

I would ask, reader, what do two men getting married have to do with deficits?

Posted by D-Vega

2009-11-03 14:44:30

Obama supports both items?
whats_up

Leaving 2/3 of the reductions in effect.

That is still raising taxes is it not Bill?
RWNReader2

There is a reason that no one has ever been able to describe the principals of the 'core' of the Democratic party without pretending that Republicans are evil people who want old people and babies to starve to death.
BIG

Posted by whats_up

2009-11-03 14:56:53

So when the Bush tax cuts expire, you will blame Obama for raising taxes on the poor?
RWNReader2

Obama supports both items?

LOL! proves my point doesn't it! Liberals instictively assume that their candidates are lying to them about certain global issues because they somehow 'know' he stands with them on their narrow selfish interests, even when he says the exact opposite. Those obstuctionists Republicans made him do it, darn it!
D-Vega

I would worry about your own party's political "core" before you start commenting on others.
whats_up

So when the Bush tax cuts expire, you will blame Obama for raising taxes on the poor?

Posted by BIG

2009-11-03 15:05:37

Will you? Seems to me you will, even knowing what Reagan did, but that is what we have come to expect from conservatives.
Living_Right_in_CA

I would worry about your own party's political "core" before you start commenting on others.

Posted by D-Vega

2009-11-03 15:11:41

Back at ya.. Afraid to answer my question?

So when the Bush tax cuts expire, you will blame Obama for raising taxes on the poor?

Posted by BIG

2009-11-03 15:05:37

Thats gonna leave a mark!!!
D-Vega

I thought the poor didn't pay taxes.
D-Vega

I am not sure of the answer, Living_Right.
Living_Right_in_CA

For you D-Vega…

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/b…
Living_Right_in_CA

Answer is Jimmy Carter…Now those were some great economic times with super majority one-party (Dem) rule.. It was the Great Malaise Days !!!!
RWNReader2

worry about your party's political "core" before you start commenting on others.

LOL, love your attempt to change the subject! Of course I worry about the POLITICAL core – that's why NY-23 DOES matter to the conservative POLITICAL cause – however, I DO NOT worry about my party's "core" PRINCIPALS, which is what I SAID. You however, cannot even

describe the principals of the 'core' of the Democratic party without pretending that Republicans are evil people who want old people and babies to starve to death.

For us, core principals are very easy enumerated, because we actually believe in something. Your side cannot even begin to describe them, because you stand for nothing.
http://TheNixonTape.Blogspot.Com Dick_Nixon

MoveOn.org is sending out emails today seeking more contributions for its campaign to defeat any Democratic senator who does not fully support Obamacare. Yesterday the left-wing activist group asked members to contribute "to a primary challenge against any Democratic senator who helps Republicans block an up-or-down vote on health care reform." Today, MoveOn reports that it has received $2 million in pledges in less than 24 hours. "It's a clear sign of how angry progressives would be at any Democrat who helps filibuster reform," MoveOn executive director Justin Ruben writes in the new email.

"The larger the war chest we can offer a potential challenger, the stronger the signal we'll send to conservative Democrats," Ruben continues. "So we're setting a huge new goal: $3 million in total pledges by the end of the week. That's plenty to launch a serious primary challenge."

From Ace of Spades HQ. Moveon, isn't that Soros? Are the Democrats in a civil war or something? Nixon thought it was the right imploding, per our liberal "friends" here.
Living_Right_in_CA

I thought the poor didn't pay taxes.

Posted by D-Vega

2009-11-03 15:18:10

Fewer do thanks to Bush..(W)
D-Vega

I would ask, reader, what do two men getting married have to do with deficits?
LampofDiogenes

I thought the poor didn't pay taxes.

Posted by D-Vega

2009-11-03 15:18:10

And, unfortunately, a greater and greater percentage of them don't pay federal income taxes. Sales taxes? Sure. Excise, gas taxes, etc. Yep. But liberals (including, in this instance, GW Bush) have continued to make the federal income tax more and more "progressive," such that more and more of the "poor" don't pay federal income tax. And, therefore, have no "skin in the game." If I'm not paying for it, why not vote myself bread and circuses? "The rich" will pay for it all. Until, as Maggie Thatcher wisely pointed out, you run out of other people's money.
tblrk2006

I thought the poor didn't pay taxes.

Posted by D-Vega

2009-11-03 15:18:10

They dont. Hell, even your govt says so.
GDR

Here is a great article on how your personal liberty and freedom have a great deal to do with the quality of the Health Care you receive:

http://andrews.blogtownhall.com/2009/11/03/public…

Yes, liberty does really matter in the real world and not just in the abstract…

And if a conservative or Republican politican can articulate this in terms people can understand then shame on him – its not that hard to explain or grasp…
http://networdblog.blogspot.com/ Christopher_Taylor

Actually, the poor do pay taxes of one sort: sin taxes. Cigarette and liquor taxes hit the poor hardest and those are the ones that were raised. You Lie, President Obama. I know, big shock.

The History of Ernesto Che Guevara – A Short Story

Premium Right Ads

Blogads Right

Previous Features

The Best Quotes From “Ten Prayers God Always Says Yes To”

Hey Lady Gaga, Kids Have a Time-Tested Answer for Bullies: Punch Them in the Mouth

Seven Differences Between Winners And Losers

The Problem With The Occupy Wall Street Generation

The 20 Most Influential Black Republicans

Talking With Chuck D. From Public Enemy About Farrakhan, Air America’s Failure, And Open Borders

User Info

Features

Archives Best of RWN Humor John Hawkins Interviews Quotes Special to RWN