The Coming Wave Election of 2010

2009 September 17
by MFG

NH solidly Republican

NC solidly Republican

These are simply the most current polling examples of the hurricane that is starting to brew for the Communist Party in 2010

Republicans have excellent chances to win in NV DE IL CT CO and in states where they might normally be in trouble such as NC and NH above they are in excellent shape

2010 is shaping up to be a worse mid term for the Communists than 1994

I think it looks like +5 to +7 for the Republicans in the Senate right now

Polling data from

48 Responses leave one →
  1. 2009 September 17 9:03 am
    bc3b permalink

    This is good news, particularly regarding Ayotte. From everything I have read, she’s NOT A RINO and 2010 would be a good time to elect true conservatives by declaring open season on RINOs in the primaries.

    I couldn’t care less if Kirk (48 ACU rating in 2008) wins in Illinois or Castle (20 ACU rating in 2008) wins in Delaware. Kirk was one of the 8 GOP members in the House to vote for Cap & Trade and is a strong abortion rights supporter. Castle would be a male Olympia Snowe.

    If you’re going to contribute, send it to candidates like Kelly Ayotte. If you give it to the GOP, they will just waste it on the likes of Mark Kirk.

  2. 2009 September 17 9:17 am
    drdog09 permalink

    I would happy to see +4 pickup just to prevent reconciliation.

  3. 2009 September 17 9:22 am
    bc3b permalink

    drdog09 –

    You are right, but our best chances are in the House. Lots of senators are running in deep blue states in 2010.

  4. 2009 September 17 9:24 am
    mpthompson permalink

    2010 is shaping up to be a worse mid term for the Communists than 1994

    Unfortunately we are talking about here the GOP of 2010 rather than the GOP of 1994. The party has changed a lot in the last 16 years and I have a sneaking feeling there will be a LOT of foot shooting going on in the next 13 months. I hope I’m wrong.

  5. 2009 September 17 9:30 am
    conservativetony permalink

    MFG, not only is 2010 shaping up to be a very bad year for the Demcrat party on the Congressional level, but it also portends huge losses in the state Houses across the country.

    l haven’t seen any numbers yet on this aspect, but in 1994 it was significant. I can’t imagine it wouldn’t happen again.

  6. 2009 September 17 9:37 am
    MFG permalink


    You dump on Snowe and Collins 24/7 but had you had your way both of these Senators would have been replaced by far left Communists (like Chafee was replaced by a psychopath in RI) and HELLCARE WOULD BE GUARANTEED TO GO INTO EFFECT!!!

    Kirk at 48?

    In IL??

    Yes, please…

  7. 2009 September 17 9:39 am

    I would be happy to see +4 pickup just to prevent reconciliation.

    The reconciliation will happen before the next election I fear.

  8. 2009 September 17 9:47 am


    Maine is a secular pro abortion state, so it is a lose-lose for us conservatives there. I could care less who they put up to run for Senate.

  9. 2009 September 17 9:49 am

    If RINOs Rudy or Pataki jump in for the NY Senate seat then it could get intersting there too. Especially with Gillebrand voting to fund Acorn.

  10. 2009 September 17 9:51 am
    knova permalink

    Eph are you saying that you would allow Obamacare, higher taxes and fewer liberties if only we could be an anti abortion state? I think that what MFG is saying that we may not get everything we want, but we get the important stuff. At least at this 5 minutes, thank goodness for Snowe and Collins.

  11. 2009 September 17 9:54 am
    bc3b permalink

    MFG –

    You have a far greater love for appreciation of RINOs than I do. Name ONE Democrat in Congress who votes with his/her party less than 50% of the time. You can’t because there isn’t one.

    My point is that if we donate to the GOP, the money will likely go to the likes of Kirk. Let’s donate our resources (time and money) to candidates who are not likely to stab us in the back on a frequent basis. I may harp on Snowe/Collins 24/7, but at lkeast I don’t blindly support anyone who simply claims to be a Republican.

  12. 2009 September 17 10:00 am
    knova permalink

    bc – I still have not been given a definition of RINO that we all can agree on. To me you turn in your GOP credentials when you vote against fiscal discipline and a larger more intrusive government. Other have a different definition.

  13. 2009 September 17 10:01 am


    We’ll see at the end of the day where Snowe and Collins wind up on Obamacare. If Arlen can sell the GOP out so can these two.

  14. 2009 September 17 10:02 am

    Kirk and Castle are difficult pills to swallow. We have a solid candidate in CO though. She’s quite the conservativve.

  15. 2009 September 17 10:04 am
    knova permalink

    eph, right now they are what stands between it passing or not. Remember that they have constituents to whom they answer. Mainers are fairly independent and blue collar, but like Vermont there is a sizable “rich hippie” contingent. Instead of damning them we need to encourage them to stay strong.

  16. 2009 September 17 10:09 am

    drip drip drip…

    …and remember it was Gallup that said Hussein would beat McCain by double digits!

  17. 2009 September 17 10:35 am

  18. 2009 September 17 10:44 am
    bc3b permalink

    Mark Kirk positions:
    – Pro-abortion (incl. partial birth) – 100% NORAL rating
    – Pro cap & trade (one of 8 GOP House members to vote for it)
    – Pro gun control
    – Pro gay rights
    – Pro big spending
    – In his defense, he is pro-defense

    – Tuesday Group
    – Main Street Republican Partnership
    – Republican Majority for Choice
    – Republicans for Choice
    – Republicans for Environmental Protection

    Accepted $1,000 contribution from Tony Rezko (of Barack Obama fame)

    Will he be better than his Democratic opponent? Probably. But why contribute to Kirk when you can contribute to someone like Kelly Ayotte, who holds the opposite views?

    A senate vote from a small state like New Hampshire carries the same weight as a senate vote from Illinois or California.

  19. 2009 September 17 10:50 am
    MFG permalink


    You’re not responding to my point

    Had you had your way Snowe and Collins would both be gone today, and they would have both been replaced by far left super-psycho Communist lunatics

    And HellCare would be a fait accompli

    I don’t get it

    I really don’t

  20. 2009 September 17 10:50 am
    MFG permalink

    Kirk sucks?

    How do you like Burress????????????

  21. 2009 September 17 10:56 am
    INC permalink

    These articles deserve a separate post, but I don’t have time.

    Jarrett is scary–an enabler of the Obamas.

    She’s the low profile member of the trio of power: Rahm, Axelrod and Jarrett. She is possibly the most powerful member of that trio.

    Glenn Beck Exposes Valerie Jarrett’s Radicalism

    On his radio show Tuesday, Beck interviewed Scott Baker, now of Breitbart TV, a self-described “news junkie” who clearly did his research on Jarrett.[1]

    Jarrett’s relationship with the Obamas, incoming administration radicals, and a socialist revolutionary who says she “probably” rejects violence (and allegedly offered Rod Blagojevich access to Obama’s fundraisers if he appointed Jarrett to Obama’s senate seat) filled up 4,000 words in my article for Monday’s FrontPage Magazine. Jarrett is, by all accounts, the closest friend and adviser to the first family. Obama says he doesn’t make a decision without her, and Jarrett described her relationship with the president by saying, “We have kind of a mind meld.”…

    Michelle Obama owes her career at Chicago’s city hall to Valerie Jarrett. In turn, Jarrett owes her secular career in real estate (at a firm called Habitat) to Marilyn Katz, an SDS radical who showed Days of Rage protesters how to fuse nails together to throw at oncoming police officers in 1968 Chicago.

    Valerie Jarrett: The Next Van Jones

    Closer to the fore, Jones owed his elevation to another new factor: the unparalleled influence of Valerie Jarrett. To call Jarrett a presidential adviser, even a close adviser, is misleading. She is an alter ego, an inner conscience, a touchstone of clarity for both President Obama and first lady Michelle. In the frenzy of the presidency, she reminds both Obamas of their identity and deepest-held beliefs. In exchange, the president makes no decision without her and has said she can “speak for me.” Unfortunately, she is also a racially polarizing elitist. She obtained her first foothold in Chicago politics through the patronage of a former SDS radical who regrets “nothing” about her role in the Days of Rage and ventured in 2003 that she “would probably reject violence as a useful form of revolution.” The same radical tried to persuade Rod Blagojevich to name Jarrett to Obama’s empty senate seat. Instead, Jarrett has served as a conduit of far-leftists into the administration….

    One thing is beyond question: Jarrett’s unprecedented sway over the president. An Obama 2008 campaign official told the New York Times, “If you want him to do something, there are two people he’s not going to say no to: Valerie Jarrett and Michelle Obama.” Susan Sher, who helped Jarrett recruit Michelle Obama to the Chicago mayor’s office before Michelle married the president, said, “I don’t think either of them [the Obamas] made major decisions without talking to her,” adding that Jarrett failed to appreciate “how incredibly instrumental she’ll be in virtually everything” in the White House….

    If Jarrett failed to anticipate her power, she acknowledges her closeness to the leader of the free world. “We have kind of a mind meld,” Jarrett said about Obama. “And chances are, what he wants to do is what I’d want to do.” Chicago tycoon Martin Nesbitt identified the source of Jarrett’s power in the fact that she establishes both Michelle and Barack’s “whole notion of authenticity.” Nesbitt relates she channels the Obamas’ inner voice, telling them: “That’s not you. You wouldn’t say that. Somebody else is saying that. Barack Obama wouldn’t say that.” Jarrett admitted to Vogue, “I kind of know what makes them who they are.”

    This is just really weird.

  22. 2009 September 17 11:18 am
    bc3b permalink

    MFG –

    Burress is not seeking re-election.

    My point is that had we “primaried” a RINO years ago, we might have lost a seat for a term. But, we might have a reliable conservative (who votes with the party 90% of the time instead of 60%).

    RINOs don’t get better over the years; they get worse. The first ACU score behind a senator’s name is 2006. The second is 2008:

    Murkowski: 71-58
    McCain: 80-63
    Lugar: 88-63
    Snowe: 36-12
    Collins: 48-20
    Coleman: 68-48
    Dominici: 75-64
    Voinovich: 56-52
    Specter: 43-42

  23. 2009 September 17 11:22 am
    MFG permalink

    So what?

    Get rid of all of the Rino’s and we’re the Soviet Union and lose every vote 72-28 in the Senate

    I love you to death and you’re the very heart and soul of this blog, but I just don’t get it

    With a few exceptions (The Terminator and Bloomberg for example) any Republican is better than any Democrat

  24. 2009 September 17 11:22 am
    Havok permalink

    Most of the people that vote liberal here in the Granite State are transplants from other states. So are the liberals that get elected.
    Still there is a strong streak of libertarian here because of groups like the Porcupine club, who regularly remind people of our rights with open carry, etc.
    I love open carrying up here.

  25. 2009 September 17 11:23 am
    MFG permalink

    Look at your list Coleman at 68 then 48

    What will Franken’s scores be…???

  26. 2009 September 17 11:27 am
    MFG permalink

    Also remember if your dream comes true and Palin is elected POTUS she will HAVE to have one house of Congress in R hands in order to accomplish ANYTHING

    Snowe, Collins etc will vote R to organize the Senate and vote for her SCOTUS picks

    Run the RINO’s out and the Communists have the House and the Senate and her Presidency is dead from day one

    We don’t have a RINO problem, we have a “too few Republicans” problem

  27. 2009 September 17 11:44 am
    bc3b permalink

    MFG –

    Norm Coleman lost by 312 votes. Primarily conservative third party candidates fielded 460,335 votes. Perhaps, had Coleman acted (and voted) more like a Republican, he might have garnered 313 votes that went to the Independence, Constitution and Libertarian parties. If Coleman would just have received 7/100s of a percent of the third party vote, he would have won.

    Don’t cry about Norm Coleman. He determined his own fate.

  28. 2009 September 17 11:57 am
    bc3b permalink

    MFG –

    “So what?

    “Get rid of all of the Rino’s and we’re the Soviet Union and lose every vote 72-28 in the Senate.”

    Not true in many cases. For example, being a Republican is tantimount to getting elected in Utah (provided the candidate is Mormon). If we “primary” Bob Bennett, Mark Shurtleff becomes senator and he’s much more conservative than Bennett. Utah is wierd because if a candidate gets 60%+ votes at the state convention, there is no primary. There probably will be a Utah primary in 2010.

  29. 2009 September 17 12:18 pm

    27. And while the national GOP was pumping millions into PA – a state MAC lost by 11 points – they pretty much ignored the Senate race in MN

  30. 2009 September 17 12:20 pm


    I heard that Bennett is supporting Obamacare2 b/c he hates Sara Palin. When Palin wrote about Obama’s death panels Bennett decided to join the libs b/c he cant dtand Palin. It’s on ongoing Christain vs. LDS thing. Sort of like Romney – Huckabee from 2008.

  31. 2009 September 17 12:49 pm
    drdog09 permalink

    WOHO!! House votes to defund ACORN.

  32. 2009 September 17 12:51 pm
    drdog09 permalink

  33. 2009 September 17 1:13 pm

    Question: How do you all customize the links you post?

  34. 2009 September 17 1:15 pm

    32. How many of the 75 that voted nay were Republican? Any??

  35. 2009 September 17 1:18 pm
    phineas gage permalink

    Charlie Gibson, call your office!

  36. 2009 September 17 1:19 pm
    knova permalink

  37. 2009 September 17 2:09 pm

    I’m gonna continue to play mr. worry wort for awhile. Elections are still a year away. I still am only thinking +20 or so and maybe +2 in senate, though the later is actually quite the improvement since early spring. I hope come late spring things still look like they look today so I could get more optimistic.

  38. 2009 September 17 2:11 pm

    Name ONE Democrat in Congress who votes with his/her party less than 50% of the time

    Does one even come close? I’m just curious if anyone’s even in the high 50’s… I seriously doubt it.

  39. 2009 September 17 2:23 pm

    The 345 to 74 was to recommit with instructions;

    The FINAL vote as follows

  40. 2009 September 17 2:24 pm

    Why would the GOP waste money on a candidate that votes with the party less than 50% of the time?

  41. 2009 September 17 2:33 pm
    drdog09 permalink

    JM I assume that was you tweaking 33. Thx!

  42. 2009 September 17 2:35 pm
    JustMary permalink

    No problem!

  43. 2009 September 17 2:37 pm

    “2010 is shaping up to be a worse mid term for the Communists than 1994”

    We’ll know this November – NJ and VA

  44. 2009 September 17 2:58 pm
    brucefdb permalink

    I think it is way too early to come to any conclusions. Obviously our best chance to pick up seats is in the House.

    In the Senate we have to defend as many seats as the Dems do (19). I can’t see us making significant gains there right now.

    In 2012 the Dems need to defend 23 seats in the Senate and we only have to defend 9. That will be the big chance to change things in the Senate and the White House.

    Of course if Ogabe keeps pushing these other programs perhaps there will be a revolution. In that case I think they will figure out a way to declare a National Emergency and not have midterm elections. Or perhaps they will use voting machines designed by Hugo Chavez’ company.

  45. 2009 September 17 3:01 pm
    RepublicanPundit permalink

    I see at least one Rino on that list who voted to keep funding ACORN:

    Kirk. Are there any more that one can quickly recognize?

  46. 2009 September 17 3:11 pm

    Rino turncoats on the vote

    Johnson (ill)

  47. 2009 September 17 6:20 pm
    RepublicanPundit permalink

    I was glad to see that congress voted to remove all funding for Acorn, however, when one does not know how they get their money, one does not have the means to limit.

    We need an FBI investigation now.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.