It's all about playing down expectations

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs warned on Sunday that there is a concrete possability the Republicans could take back the House of Representatives in November. This is one of the first public admissions of political trouble from the Democratic establishment. Conservative pundits were quick to jump on the prospect of the Obama Administration sounding the alarm so early in the election cycle, citing the weakness of their position. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has repeatedly asserted the Democrats' House majority is not in danger, citing individual house races, but her statements have only become more positive following the completion of the health care debate.

Pelosi has a point here. Though the national trends have the GOP at a slight advantage, there are numerous reasons to suggest they will fall short of a majority. The individual House races that feature vulnerable Democratic incumbents are polling better for the majority party than would be expected. The Democrats also have a massive fund-raising advantage. Above all else, the Republicans are not viewed as a good alternative to the Democrats by the electorate. The nomination of people like Sharron Angle and Rand Paul does nothing to improve their standing in this area.

Furthermore, the White House statements about the Democratic Party's chances in November are likely to play down expectations. The Republican Party has been trumpeting their inevitable win so loudly that anything short of a sweep in November will make them look bad. It is likely Democratic strategists have realized there will be political capital to be had if the Republicans do not win the election by a mile. The comments could also have been trying to arouse the Democratic base, who are frightened by the idea of John Boehner (R-OH) as Speaker of the House.

Has anybody other than Obama remembered the War in Iraq?

Joel Wing, the author of the blog Musings on Iraq has correctly pointed out the number of U.S. troops stationed in Iraq has declined from a high water mark of 171,000 in October 2007 to a mere 77,500 today. This is mainly a result of Obama's withdrawal strategy he announced soon after being sworn in as President. This fact has mainly been overlooked by the mainstream media, who have been preoccupied by the President's Afghanistan strategy. Yes, many of the troops being withdrawn from Iraq will eventually end up in Afghanistan, but that does not mean that the United States withdrawing from Iraq is not a big deal. The war in Iraq is arguably one of the most controversial military incursions the U.S. has ever engaged in, after Vietnam. Afghanistan, however, is far from that.

President Obama announced his strategy in Afghanistan to the usual responses. The liberals criticized the surge and conservatives criticized the planned withdrawal. The notable thing there was the existence of a withdrawal at all. Had Obama really wanted to fight the war in Afghanistan he would not have set a withdrawal date. By pulling troops from Iraq to Afghanistan he was doing a politically popular move. Once public opinion toward the War in Afghanistan shifts toward opposition, Obama can easily pull all the remaining troops out of the Middle East. Expect public opinion to solidify in the coming months around strong disapproval of the war. When that happens, it is likely we will see most combat troops returning home.


This is what I hope will happen. Escalating the War in Afghanistan was a pillar of Obama's campaign, one which seems to be forgotten by most anti-war activists. If he doesn't withdraw from Afghanistan, get ready for Lyndon Johnson (The Sequel.)

Recess appointments are far from ideal, but definately warranted at this point

The Obama Administration has finally realized it has to do something about Republican holds on nominees in the Senate. This week, President Obama appointed Dr. Donald Berwick to be the head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) through a recess appointment. The recess appointment is a controversial process by which a President bypasses Congress in appointing federal officials to a half-term (2 years) during a Congressional recess.

Since being elected, President Obama has faced record numbers of holds on his nominees. This leaves the federal government without the staff and leadership it needs to carry out its duties. Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL) made headlines this year when he held hostage all federal nominations for pet projects back home. He eventually agreed to release the hold, though many of these nominees have yet to be confirmed.

Now, The Hill is reporting Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has blasted the Obama Administration for doing a recess appointment. His opposition mainly has to do with a single quote Berwick made about health care rationing in the past. What is really "truly outraging" is not the recess appointments, but the obstruction the Republicans are engaging in. You cannot blame the government for failing to stimulate the economy when you deprive them of the people needed to carry out the law.

Tom Perriello steps on cow pie

This is a must see video. Tom Perriello (D-VA) just released his first television ad of the 2010 election cycle, attempting to display his successes in bringing jobs to his district and improving infrastructure. He mainly just ends up getting hit with a branch, stepping on a cow pie, getting debris dumped on his head, and ruining what looks to be a very expensive suit.



Regardless of whether you would ask this guy to change his clothes before coming in your house, he is very remarkable. Despite representing a district with a PVI of R+5; he has voted for the stimulus bill, the health care reform bills, the climate change reduction act, and other major Democratic priorities. A recent poll has put both Perriello and his Republican challenger at 44% each. The House cannot lose such a valuable Democrat.

This video is definitely worth watching.

Get your vote in!

I am adding a new feature to this site called the Sarah Palin Award. It allows readers to choose between some of the most extreme politicians and candidates running this fall. The feature is located on the right side of the website and will be open until September 1st. Get your vote in or suggest other contenders in the comments section of this post.

Who created this deficit, really?

From the Center for Budget Policy and Priorities comes the unexpected news that the Obama Administration policies have had little impact on the federal deficit after all. A new report released shows the deficit would barely top 3 billion dollars if it were not for the policies of the Bush 43 Administration. The TARP program is projected to be close to deficit neutral as the money is paid back, the recovery measures will be paid for in increased tax revenue, and the economic downturn will eventually subside. The enormous tax cuts enacted by the Republican Congress will balloon the budget shortfall and the ongoing wars in Iraq/Afghanistan will further sink any hope of fiscal solvency.

The first implications of these findings is it builds a strong case for deficit hawks to allow the Bush tax cuts to expire. The UI extension in the senate would extend the tax cuts for all but the wealthiest of Americans. Both Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi have shown an ambivalence about passing a tax extenders bill without an extension of Unemployment Insurance. The second implication of this data is it could somehow translate into an opportunity for the Democrats to regain the upper hand on spending and the deficit. However, the Republicans will likely criticize the "liberal media" for twisting the data as usual.

Why is Harry Reid rebounding?

Harry Reid was a lost cause. Both Minority Whip Dick Durbin and Chuck Schumer have been publicly vying for his position for over a year now when it is assumed he will be defeated for reelection. Not so fast, says a recent Mason-Dixie poll recently released which shows his numbers rebounding significantly. Reid slightly trails potential challengers Sue Lowden and Danny Tarkanian and actually LEADS Sharon Angle. These are not good numbers for an incumbent by any means, but they indicate a competitive race. So my question is, what has caused this sudden reversal of fortune. The surge can be attributed to several factors.

1. The Republican field- The Republicans have fielded a very poor assortment of candidates in this race. Danny Tarkanian has no political experience at all, Sue Lowden is the Nevada GOP chair, and Sharon Angle is a former state assemblywoman. Sue Lowden, the presumed front runner, has been bogged down by numerous gaffes since launching her campaign. The most famous of these is when she suggested bringing chickens to healthcare providers was a good way of bringing down costs. Sharon Angle is the Tea Party favorite. Like many people conservative enough to be Tea Party affiliates, they do not match their electorate. Nevada is a swing state. Being associated with a right wing organization does not help you with the general electorate.
2. The immigration debate- This is where most pundits have fallen short. The bounce comes as an extensive immigration bill is introduced into the Senate with widespread Republican opposition. This clearly drove Hispanics to Reid's camp in large numbers.
3. Reid's war chest- Very, very large. It was $11 million at the beginning of the election season, but could now be as much as $25 million. Hard to top these numbers.

On top of all these factors, Democrats have been rebounding slightly in national polls. They hold the generic ballot once again, are surging in swing states, and are finally deploying a messaging strategy. If Harry Reid is not defeated for reelection, it will be very difficult for the RSCC to peel off other swing states.