OH-01: Chabot Leads Driehaus in Rematch by 17 Points

In the battle of the Steves, two may enter, but only one may leave.

SurveyUSA for Firedoglake (1/12-14, likely voters):

Steve Driehaus (D-inc): 39

Steve Chabot (R): 56

Undecided: 5

(MoE: ±4.1%)

I don’t think you need me to tell you that this is “rough”. Ohio’s 1st District has been a tough nut to crack for Democrats, usually leaning ever so slightly to the GOP. Al Gore lost the district by 46-51 in 2000, and John Kerry came up two points short four years later. Obama finally busted the dam open, winning the CD by a remarkable 55-44 spread. Now, if this poll is to be believed (and I can believe it), Obama has a 42-55 approval rating among likely voters in the district.


RaceTracker Wiki: OH-01

117 thoughts on “OH-01: Chabot Leads Driehaus in Rematch by 17 Points”

  1. that Dems are also in deep trouble outside of the south.

    You can see why the President is going populist against the bankers.  

  2. I don’t know they are polling vulnerable Democrats who voted for HCR, along with these extremely loaded questions that sound more like right-wing push poll questions. What I don’t understand is why they are polling districts like AR-02 and OH-01, it’s detrimental for two reasons:

    1.) It just makes Republicans see the incumbents as even more vulnerable in November.

    2.) It make these Democrats who vote with the party on most issues even less likely to vote for HCR or other Democratic initiatives because they will consider them political detrimental, which is kind of against the point of what they are trying to do. I’m sure next that they will poll more of our more valuable incumbents from tough districts like Perriello, Carney, Space, Edwards, etc.

    I don’t quite understand their motivation and why they are choosing these Democrats to poll. Firedoglake seems abosultely nuts.

  3. And I dont really care anymore.  Getting 30 million more people health insurance is worth every Democratic loss, period.  The Democrats do what’s right and what’s the path forward, the GOP does what wins.

  4. The rest of you, go grab your cult robes (or red Snuggies) and meet in the abandoned church at 11:55 p.m.

    Together, we’ll go to a better place, where the progressives ALWAYS win.

    /depressed snark

  5. as saying that Steve Driehaus is BY FAR the most vulnerable democratic representative from Ohio.  Not even close.  The guy was elected mostly because of a huge increase in minority turnout during the 2008 election.  OH-1 had never seen a 25%+ black electorate in it’s history.  And even with all of that, Driehaus still only won by 4-5%.  In this environment with the turnout being what it is, I would be absolutely stunned if he managed to win the rematch with Chabot.  

    That being said, I think that Driehaus isn’t going anywhere, and that these two are probably headed for a rubber match in 2012, where the turnout will be in Dreihaus’s favor again.  

  6. So we start with:

    Chabot 56%, Dreihaus 39%

    Then they again ask all those anti-health care bill questions, and then ask what would voters do if Dreihaus voted for the bill.  After all that?

    Chabot 56%, Dreihaus 38%

    Chabot gains no ground from that, even after all those questions.  Dreihaus only loses ONE point, well within the margin of error.

  7. This will be a tough hold but Drihaus can still hold it. This seat is actually similar to southern seats in that the intensity and turnout of the black vote in Cincy is the deciding factor. Most of the suburbs in this district are still red except for Forest Park, and Springdale. There has been movement towards the Dems in the last few years in Hamilton County, controlling the county commission for the first time in 60 years. There was a good vote for Obama, even doing well in the suburbs. Hamilton County is no longer a GOP stronghold but it will oscillate between the parties. Chabot and Dreihaus share the same political base among the german catholic neighborhoods in price hill and western hills. I would expect OFA and the other groups will work hard to hold this seat along with the DCCC. While AR-2 outside of Little Rock has been moving away from the Dems, OH-1 is a seat the Dems need to hold.  

    1. You’ve included the 44 “likely D” races in the “84 Dem held seats” number, which Cook defines as

      Likely: These seats are not considered competitive at this point but have the potential to become engaged.

      I don’t see more than 1 or 2 of these “likely D” races becoming competitive (there are always a few surprises in house races) – unless there’s a “double dip” in the current economic downturn. (A double dip is unlikely in my mind, but we’re certainly not out of the woods in that respect.)

      And even then, there is no Newt to take advantage, no “contract with America;” unlike in ’94, campaign balance sheets favor Ds.

      I think it more likely that maybe 1/4 to (my worst case) 1/2 of the lean D and “toss up” D seats are lost, depending on the unemployment rate in about June (or whenever the image of the current economic recovery is frozen in voters’ minds).

  8. Chabot was an habitual incumbent with less than 55% numbers against dem challengers and now seems he can break his habitual level when he was incumbent.

    I think this poll is only a call for Chabot run a rematch.

    OH-01 is a D+1 district in red areas of a purple state. Democrats only have close results in 2008 in D+ districts in red or purple states in:

    – LA-02 (D+25): J Cao (R) defeat W Jefferson.

    – OH-12 (D+1): P Tiberi (R) win the reelection.

    – OH-15 (D+1): MJ Kilroy (D) defeat S Stivers (R) for the open seat by less than 1%.

    – OH-01 (D+1): S Driehaus (D) defeat S Chabot (R) incumbent by less than 5%.

    All other D+ districts in red or purple states give victories with more than 10% for dems.

    J Cao, P Tiberi and S Stivers will run again and this poll find S Chabot consider a rematch. S Chabot is one of few bids of recruitment what republicans can make in D+ territory. This poll is not casual.

    I think S Chabot finally will not run.

  9. Is OH-1 much outside “the South”? The Queen City’s always struck me as one of the most right-leaning urban areas in the country.

  10. Driehaus narrowly beat Chabot thanks to an increase in black turnout from the Obama campaign, and Chabot has a history with the district, having represented this area since 1995. It would definitely be time for Democrats to push the full-on alert button if Chabot was losing this badly to, say, a city councilman or state rep, but it’s understandable that a former Congressman who up until a year ago was representing the area is running strong. I expect polling numbers would be similar for Harry Teague, who also faces a former Congressman with long-standing ties to the district.

  11. honestly think the toplines show more progressive leadership would save Driehaus. Driehaus has been a good Democrat in a swing district and they’re dancing in glee over his demise because it’ll show the leadership a lesson.

    FDL is a fucking joke, I can’t wait until they’re marginalized permanently.

    I just got healthcare at work, part me hopes Driehaus votes no and blows the whole thing up now and nothing gets fucking passed.  

  12. The southern/southwestern part of Ohio has a lot of kinship with Kentucky. Some folks who live in that area have southern accents. One woman I knew from there (who did indeed have such an accent) referred to the region as “Middletucky.”

  13. …Kentucky and Indiana, which are pretty red. The main population center, Cincinnati, is Kentucky-centric compared to the rest of Ohio (for a lot of Kentuckians, it’s the closest big city).

    Cincinnati doesn’t quite have the burnt-out post-industrial feel of say, Cleveland or Detroit, but it’s not exactly home to a robust economy. I’d guess local voters are pretty attuned to that fact, what with the general suckery of the Ohio economy.

    The gay scene is so-so, especially for “the Queen City” although Wikipedia provided this fun fact: Northside, the city’s “gay” district, was originally known as “North Cumminsville”, but changed names to “Northside” several decades ago. Other than that, I dunno, I was only there for a few days.

  14. And she had one of the strongest Southern accents that I’ve ever heard. Traveling through Southern Ohio feels similar to being in Appalachia, even when the mountains are gone.

  15. is in Kentucky… (There’s a great German brewery on the KY side, I forget the name)

    In any case, it’s part of the Appalachain/Oklahoma belt that’s most amenable to wingnut/ tea party appeals.

  16. I had friends that called it “Cincinnati, Kentucky.”  Hell, even the city’s airport is technically in another state.

  17. Face it, FDL does have a axe to gring with Dems who voted no on HCR and it makes me sick with the polls their commissioning with the questions they included. Sorry I agree with DTO and i’ll strongly take this poll with a grain of salt. Look around alot of the posters are saying the same thing outside the grain of salt thing.

  18. to do the kind of issue and process discussion here necessary for me to explain the nature of my disagreement.

    IN any cause, you should take any poll with a grain of salt, but so far as I know, SUSA is not in the practice of cooking toplines for its clients. Like James, I believe this result.  

  19. the polls they commissioned are targeting Democrats in vulnerable district who actually voted for the thing.

    I would at least have an ounce of respect for them if they targeted those who voted no, but considering the numbers PPP showed for Larry Kissel and Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin, I think they realize those numbers won’t be to their liking, so they commission a poll on vulnerable Democrats who voted yes with the intention of proving that these vulnerable Democrats who voted yes were on the healthcare would be on better footing, especially with a more liberal bill, showed it wasn’t so, and decided to spin as “they’re being sunk by the corporate Dem President and leadership”

    Even though the polls show only about a quarter of each district actually wants a more liberal bill.

  20. I’m ready to accept a big loss if it means getting HCR passed. I don’t care about anything else right noe except that. But hey people don’t like the same party controlling the WH and Congress.They want divided government because it provided a “check”. Only problem is in divided government nothing gets done. That’s why they call it DIVIDED. Oh well i’m glad that outside of Tekzilla I get to engage politics with people who understand politics and to be honest people who are not clueless when it comes to it, unlike the people from OpenLeft, FDL and swing voters.

  21. You can’t go forward about this because it violates the rules. You can only talk about the poll and not anything outside of it (like the group the commissioned the poll). I understand because I was banned for a week because I strongly went off topic regarding morality and sin taxes. But your right you should take any poll with a grain of salt because polls are just a snapshot. One day you can be up by five points, the next day down by two. But I will take this poll with a grain of salt because one it’s just one poll, two because I hardly doubt Driehaus is down by over 10 points and three, because of who commissioned the poll. I’m sorry but FDL got a axe to grind with Dems who voted againist HCR and it shows. Sorry but like alot of posters that posted in this thread, I don’t trust them.

    With that like you, I will move on.

  22. But its a little tough to compare this with Teague’s race as Pearce actually ended up losing this district in his senate run on ’08

  23. we have to sacrifice a majority for each piece of the agenda.

    So, what, now we regroup, fight back to win back the majority over the next decade so we can pass EFCA? Then upon losing the majority over that, do it all over again to repeal DOMA?

    It’s ridiculous. It’s almost not worth it.

  24. Wich once again proves that FDL is wrong again if there going to spin it that way. I knew Snyder voted yes same with Driehaus. But FDL still has a axe to grind with Dems who voted no on the bill and they have to learn espically out of the polls coming out that getting a more liberal bill passed isn’t going over well like what you said. Pretty much you make a great point and I agree. There wrong for what there doing and should stop.

  25. But I willing to do what it takes to get this bill passed, I can’t speak for you though. But after we pass this life goes on. Well be able to pass legislation and I think they should to be in good standing with the voters obviously. The jobs bill comes to mind. But I take back my answer. It was overreactive and knee jerk and it dosen’t belong in politics. Once healthcare gets passed other legislation will come but it’s highly important that this must get passed.

  26. that 2010 is a redistricting election and should we not have control of redistricting in many of these state, Republicans can make it so we have another decade of fighting headwinds.

  27. And the people who spread crap like the death panels for that. It will solidify us once it gets passed and we truely explain to the voters how it will benefit us. Look you knew goddamn well this wasn’t going to be easy. This is a complex controversial piece of legislation were trying to pass, you think this was going to be a cakewalk? going to happen without a fight from the right? If you thought that you need to rethink fast.

  28. And the people who spread crap like the death panels for that. It will solidify us once it gets passed and we truely explain to the voters how it will benefit us. Look you knew goddamn well this wasn’t going to be easy. This is a complex controversial piece of legislation were trying to pass, you think this was going to be a cakewalk? going to happen without a fight from the right? If you thought that you need to rethink fast.

  29. in Washington soon faces some issue which it can’t evade or resolve competently.  This becomes the rock on which that ship settles and eventually breaks its bottom.  Its captains have to go down with it as it fills with water or breaks up, most of the crew escapes on various lifeboats.

    This is part of what creates the four year cycles of factional dominance in American federal politics from one midterm election to the next.

    triumphal 1986&88, demolished 1990&92: moderate Republicans

    triumphal 1990&92, demolished 1994&96: conservative Democrats

    triumphal 1994&96, demolished 1998&00: conservative Republicans

    triumphal 1998&00, demolished 2002&04: moderate Democrats

    triumphal 2002&04, demolished 2006&08: Rightist Republicans

    triumphal 2006&08, ???????       2010&12: Leftist+centrist Democrats

    triumphal 2010&12, ???????       ????   :  ?

    Some highly simplified explanations-

    Moderate Republicans couldn’t overcome the ending of the Cold War.  I.e. the post-Kuwait recession deepened by the defunding of military weapons projects, and the incremental collapse of the USSR as a power from 1989 to 1992.

    Conservative Democrats couldn’t overcome the white voter fear of non-white people in the forms of crime and resistance to more public spending on poor (mostly non-white) people in the form of universal health care, etc.

    Conservative Republicans couldn’t overcome their foolishly broad anti-government stance in times of increasing prosperity or the religionist stance that boxed them into their morally indefensible pro-Milosevic stance on the Balkans warfare.

    Moderate Democrats couldn’t overcome the problem posed them by the antagonistic provocations and variant on Stalinist militarist dictatorship of Saddam Hussein in the Middle East, along with generalized violent bad behavior in the Middle East.  September 11 ’01 peaked the provocations.  When the 1996-2001 period of economic prosperity period ended they also weren’t capable of resisting the demands for tax cutting and increased spending that didn’t actually benefit their electorate.

    Rightist Republicans couldn’t overcome the political fruitlessness and attrition effects of the occupations they insisted on in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Nor the fallout of the governance and economic policies they instituted that were contrarian to the actual needs of the electorate at large at the time.

    The currently governing Democratic coalition of Left, center Left Democrats (“moderate Democrats”), and centrist/center Right Democrats (“conservative Democrats”)- i.e. everyone but the liberal Democrats- have pretty much cleared the particular problems that their predecessors couldn’t.

    Where things are faltering domestically are e.g. HCR, torture and prosecutory misconduct prosecutions, and other things that are the earnests of truly corrective followthrough in economic policy and domestic governance.  The good news is that the corruptions that have found protectors in the political system have been beaten soundly on the open field of American public opinion.  They are now concentrated into defensive fortresses of a sort- relatively few particular sectors of the economy and particular federal agencies, and behind relatively few legal shields.  What is lacking is political will to send out a cunning and aggressive force to eliminate them.

    And much as I hate to agree with the Israeli hawks on anything, the Khamenei/Achmedinajad rule of Iran is the key force that props obstruction of negotiated resolution of the many interlinked ethnic and territorial conflicts in most of the Middle East.  Without them in power we would rather likely see crumbling of Maliki and the Badr Shiite faction in Iraq, crumbling of the insurrection in Yemen, crumbling of Hezbollah in Lebanon, crumbling of Hamas in Gaza, Syria’s government alone in the Middle East and its people impoverishing as unyielding military antagonist of Israel.  Absent Khamenei there might also be Iranian willingness to negotiate the Kurdish autonomy problem, Azerbaijani willingness to yield most of Karabakh, and a deal possible with the Pakistanis to end the proxy war by terrorism they have at their border.  The Netanyahu government in Israel would likely also lose its most of its political raison d’etre and get voted out.  The many Arab monarchies along the Persian Gulf and their practices would also diminish greatly in political justification.  That’s a lot of dominos that could fall within months or a year or two of regime change in Teheran.

    European conflicts are now safely the EU’s to manage, the South Asian conflicts have no outsider involvement, East Asian ones are not matured to where there is full U.S. engagement and investment (though it is growing).  Which leaves the Middle East as the arena in which some perceptible American policy success is expected and continued failure unacceptable.

    Sorry this got kinda long.  Hope it was worth the read.

  30. I just thought the American people were smarter than they turned out to be. Remember when we all laughed off the absurdity as town halls and Sarah Palin’s death panels remark.

    Republicans and teabaggers won because they know Americans are morons when it comes to these things…we always seem to overestimate the intelligence of the common man.

  31. Health care reform has become broadly unpopular, and we have a bunch of seats in jeopardy as a result, because of the liberal purists who’ve attacked the legislative effort every step of the way almost as intensely as reform opponents, and often making the same arguments on some of the specific objections.

    Very few people are familiar with the substance of the bill, and even many of those who think they understand it actually misunderstand some things to which they object.  If you’re a true swing voter or a soft Democrat, you’re probably following health care reform in the news and seeing everyone bash the legislation every step of the way.  The attacks from different parties are for completely different reasons (e.g., “public option is government takeover” versus “public option is too weak”), but you don’t notice that or you disregard it, because all that really matters is that no one is strongly advocating for the legislation as it develops.

    It’s no different than in a campaign where one candidate constantly attacks the other, and the target candidate fails to respond.  The unchallenged attacks stick, no matter how untrue and unfair they are.

    So that’s why health care reform is unpopular.

    The right-wingers object on ideological grounds, including honest ones, but that’s to be expected and not enough to make reform unpopular with a clear majority.  Yes they make up lies and they demogogue for maximum effect, but that, too, doesn’t really work very well.

    What kills us is that our own side is bashing our own legislative effort.  That they do so because it’s not liberal enough is of no consequence except to show they’re delusional and politically stupid.  But that they, too, are bashing it is what matters.

    It’s all about the messaging.  And the key to getting through this all along was to just get it passed so that our own side stops attacking it and comes around to embracing that it makes things better than before.  That’s when it becomes a binary fight of us versus them, and our elected officals have a level playing field to sell the reform successfully.

  32. That was the problem as well, those dreaded townhall meetings where the morons came out of the woodwork. Like the ones who don’t want HCR to pass because they don’t want the government involved in their medicare. Except one thing…THE GOVERNMENT CREATED MEDICARE AND RUNS IT, BEEN THAT WAY FOR 40 SOME YEARS. Those were the people who frightened me because after that and those townhalls meeting it showed how dumb americans are. Maybe we did underestimate the intellenge of the common man because they elected a smart man to the WH.

    Bill Maher said it best: “Smart President, Stupid Country”.

  33. You had something to say and said you did. I wouldn’t worry. I hardly believe that Driehaus is down by 17 espically since I don’t trust the people who commissioned the poll. But his race will be competitive no doubt, but not by no landslide.

  34. I’ve always believe that you can communicate without profanity.  I guess I’m a lot like Dean Smith of Tar Heel fame.

    Of course, last year I was with my 7 year old nephew, and I was surfing on the NC Coast.  After handling a pretty good wave, my nephew comes up to me and says “you made that wave your bitch!”.  

    After his comment, I went to a specialist for the ole sniperoo.  No more children for me!

  35. I like your humor. Don’t worry this isn’t over we got 10 months to ago. A LOT can change. Alot mind you.

  36. I use profanity but rarely when i’m discussing politics (which I do on a regular basis and i’m politics buff even though i’m only 23) but I believe when you use profanity in politics it lowers you, it makes you look dumb and stupid because you can’t get our point across with using simple words, but have to by saying goddamn and bullshit and hell. It makes you dums just as the same as you call some an apologist or drinking the kool-aid when engaging in political discussion. Anyone who says apologist or kool-aid I stop debate because right there it shows to me that the guy i’m debating knows jack about politics and he uses those words to downgrade me and make me look like a drone for the candidate or incumbent i’m supporting.

  37. I wonder if it means that I definitely should or definitely should not have kids because of the fact that I found the idea of a 7-year-old saying that absolutely hilarious.

    But hey, look on the bright side: you obviously have a health plan that covers specialists!

  38. For me, if I don’t let it out every so often, I’ll go crazy.  It’s my pressure valve.  Along with beer.

  39. When i’m angry I don’t like to scream it out from the rooftop because it draws attention. Like to do it here because by doing that I get to engage politics in smart people. But you bring up beer, not that you need me to tell me this but you know the old saying, never discuss politics or religion while drinking. Causes major problems. Believe me I learned the hard way when I was discussing politics with two of my friends while they were bombed on moonshine and eating maracino cherries soaked in moonshine. Let’s just say when I left it was in a happy way.

  40. a NYC Councilman told me there were two types of people in politics;

    “Those who work within the limits of government to get as much of their agenda enacted as possible and those who stand on the outside and fling shit and get none of their agenda enacted”

    He used it to describe rabid pro-lifers and teabaggers in the GOP who were the latter. In New York, the NY Right-to-Life party often ran it’s own candidate instead of cross-endorsing the GOP nominee and it sometimes led to the defeat of the GOP nominee. But he said to me “that dynamic exists on the left too”

    People like Jane Hamsher are the shit-flingers. They may feel like they are doing a service by defeating Democrats because it makes them “fear them,” except it doesn’t…it makes them marginalize them. If Jane Hamsher and her FDL ilk really gave a flying fuck about healthcare or any progressive ideal, they would be working on the inside trying to push as much as they can. That having failed, most progressives have decided to declare victory, because they worked on the inside and pushed for the best deal they can get…it wasn’t nearly as good as they wanted, but it isn’t always.

    As for FDL (and OpenLeft) they now decide to be shit flingers, because it is, after all, all about them and what power they have. They’re not interested in getting anything enacted, they’re interested in winning, in keeping power and influence. With that, they will have neither. They will never see any of their agenda enacted. It is unfortunate that their agenda often coincides with mine, so I have an interest in seeing people like Jane Hamsher destroyed.  

  41. To provide a little context to the random equating Cincinnati with Kentucky thats been going on here. Cincinnati the city has trended blue in recent years, but the suburbs to all sides (including those in neighboring KY and IN) are extremely red. At a local level in the city proper we have had a string of consecutive democratic mayors stretching back to the early 80’s many of whom have been quite progressive (Dwight Tillery, Roxanne Qualls, and Mark Mallory (incumbent). There is no way anyone that progressive could be elected in any portion of northern kentucky, which as primarily suburbs is an extremely conservative area (re: Jim Bunning). The presence of an active the third party (the charterites) who generally side with the Dems means that on city council there are normally only a few republicans out of the 9 body council. Also while we certainly aren’t a rust belt city, there is a lot of pride in being just north of the mason-dixon line. Cincinnati was major hub of the underground railroad and generally people take being associated with Kentucky as a pretty big insult. In terms of Driehaus vs. Chabot, Chabot has had close call after close call since being elected in the 1994 wave, so I’d be very very surprised if he won by more than 5 points even in a republican year. Especially since Driehaus is from the westside (as is Chabot) and from a prominent local political family I think he’ll put up a good fight in what should be a nail biter.  

  42. it is a little off-topic, but according to the ARG poll, Brown is leading Coakley by 9% among absentees. If you may remember, Obama only won North Carolina because he ran up the score in the absentee ballots.

  43. And I love your other comment about what the NYC Councilmember once told you about two types of activists.

    The real problem with the shit-flingers is that they live so deep inside a soundproof echo chamber that they just can’t see that a majority of Americans don’t agree with us.  Nor is there a majority that agrees with conservatives.  We’re a nation of at least three broad ideological factions, the middle of which is actually too diverse in itself to call it a faction in that, for example, suburban soccer moms don’t share a common politics with unionized West Virginia miners.  But the FDLers and so many on DailyKos don’t get it, they just think our monopolistic control of federal power is a mandate to do everything liberals want.

    This is exactly why health care reform has become so unpopular, because both right and left have been attacking the legislation every step of the way, in both large ways and small.  Even if you’re not quite a kill-the-biller,

    The net result of this is that we’re about to lose a whole bunch of House and Senate seats unless not only at least modest job growth returns but also if we don’t get health care passed very, very soon in order to have a lot of lead time to wage a binary campaign against the Republicans in advocacy of the new reform law.  I have no doubt it will become increasingly popular over time, but now we’re hanging by Martha Coakley’s thread.

    A lot of seats I wouldn’t worry about go bye-bye in November if Coakley goes down Tuesday.  Conversely, if Coakley wins, we recover enough to make a real fight of it and save a lot of these people.

  44. Kilroy is an awful retail politician who had to be dragged across the line by the Obama campaign in Ohio and by a way above average turnout from the precients in and around OSU. She’s going to have a very tough time without that. Her seat is the one that I’ve been most concerned about in the entire Midwest.

    Driehaus is a much better actual politician who has a slightly tougher district. One has to keep in mind that few House Reps who lose an election ever make it back in the same district. I can only think of a few-Baron Hill (IN), Ted Strickland (OH), and David Price (NC) are the only ones I can think of off the top of my head. Nick Lampson, Ciro Rodriguez, Brian Bilbray, and Jay Inslee have all made it back in different districts.

  45. During redistricting, OH-01 will have to expand–won’t it take in more Republican areas, giving Chabot a boost?

  46. No voters polled under the age of 35 and the push poll questions were asked before voting intention. This poll is a dud and shame on fdl for allowing it to be conducted like that.

  47. If Coakley loses, health care reform fails, the recession double-dips, and Democrats lose both houses of Congress in 2010, will you shut the fuck up?  I might be willing to make the tradeoff.

  48. It might be difficult, but there is a path to passing the bill (even if it means that the House has to pass the Senate bill as is).

  49. There will be no other choice.  Or perhaps the pressure can be put so heavily on Brown from Massachussetts to support the bill in the Senate.  

  50. If Democrats keep the Ohio House of Representatives, they can force a compromise map. Such a compromise map could actually clip off the Butler County and western Hamilton County parts and expand eastward to take in more of urban Hamilton County. If I were Driehaus, I wouldn’t worry too much about redistricting.

  51. I wonder what the odds are (paging Nate Silver)

    Btw I’m not accusing SurveyUSA of rigging this or anything.  The questions may be a bit biased but they seem like a pretty honest pollster.  

  52. I think it would be worth it giving everything up we worked for just for this person to shut the hell up. I know SSP will be a happier place to come to lol.

  53. I’m not just blaming the tea baggers even though they share a good part of the blame. I blame the Chris Bowers’, the Matt Stoller’s, the David Sirota’s, the Jane Hamsher’s and a certain few of Daily Kos of the blogisphere for rather killing the bill then letting it pass because it’s not liberal enough. Sure this bill has some flaws in  it but a good bill that can benefit alot of people and these asswipes rather cut the nose to spite the face because it’s not single payer or has their precious public option in it. This whole debate shows how stupid people on the right AND the left are (minus the smart and brillant posters that make up SSP). It actually makes me sick and ashamed to be a liberal because i’m forced to be lumped in with these so called “Activists”.

    But yeah I will say this about your post Cyclone: couldn’t agree more and quoted for truth to sum it up.

  54. The overwhelming majority of liberals supported this effort even as the bill was continuously watered down.  Blame goes sqaurely on the shoulders of the conservadems.

    THEY are the ones who spoke out against overwhelmingly popular provisions like the public option and threatened the filibuster.  

    THEY are the ones that have caused that provision to be stripped out.  

    THEY are the ones that stalled and stalled, allowing the media and the teabaggers months to tear down Democrats and Obama.  

  55. Sirota and Hamsher, on the hand, are on par with the teabaggers. Sirota in particular has an ego the size of Alaska (and a political brain the size of Wasilla…)

  56. Congress will be petrified of moving forward another inch if Coakley loses an election that everyone thinks is a referendum on the health care reform bill.

    And Brown is running on an agenda of killing the bill, if he wins he’s validated.  He doesn’t flip.

  57. We will almost certainly get the votes of the retiring Dems that voted against it last time(they have nothing to lose) and many of the marginal Dems not retiring have fallen so far behind in polling that voting for the bill simply wont matter.  Dems are in the kind of situation where they have nothing left to lose.  At this rate, after 2010, Democrats wont even have the votes in the House to uphold an Obama veto.  

  58. Knew that since Grayson took ofice. It’s pretty much Bowers, Sirota and Lux running OpenLeft not. But still when he was a active blogger he was bad.

  59. Him and OpenLeft were the idiots during Obamas transition period that were spreading the meme that liberals were very unhappy with the cabinet choices Obama made and it turned out to be false (via polling liberals)

  60. Espically David Sirota. Jesus that guy has a ego and is clueless when it comes to how politics works. One thing I hate about being a lberal is i’m forced to be lumped in with these fools but hey got to take the good with the bad.

  61. I’m not with those guys, they hurt our cause as badly as the right wing does. Just like I don’t associate myself with purists like Kucinich, I don’t associate myself with lightweights like Sirota.

  62. in Maine back in October, not a bad guy, very dedicated to the LGBT, but a little too naive. I was in a conversation with him where we were talking about the French Canadians in Northern Maine, and he was convinced they would vote NO on 8 because they’re overwhelmingly Democratic…they didn’t.  

  63. like Charlie Cook, it could 70-75 seats.  Republicans would only need around 30 Democrats to roll over and vote with them on a veto override.  Just look at how cooperative Dems were with Republicans on almost everything after the GOP took over in 1994.  If Republicans win a big majority, look for them to pass whatever they want into law.

  64. Just because your a Democrat dosen’t mean you agree with everything they stand for. I’m a Dem for example and I don’t support gun control and I support welfare reform and I used to be againist same-sex marriage until 2008. People who belong to political parties all aren’t cut from the same cloth. They all have different ideologies. You bring up a good point with same sex initive in Maine.

  65. Soon there will be nothing but the soothing sound of Chuck Todd projecting nothing but democratic pickups with Charlie Cook simply nodding agreement.

  66. http://w3.newsmax.com/a/morris

    I mean, LA and TN as tossup states? FL as “strongly Obama”? That man is in political lala land w/r/t political prognostications.

    Note that it was on newsmax, which suggests that Morris by then had no interest in being fair or balanced to the D party.

  67. They do vote Democratic, but they’re very socially conservative. That’s why the Congressman from there, Mike Michaud is a liberal pro-lifer.  

  68. Here’s one from my neck of the woods: The Pittsburgh Area. Yes they vote Democratic and support unions but are very social conservative espcally on guns and abortion.  

  69. the Democratic Party is nothing more than a loosely-knitted quilt of conflicting interest groups that are using the party to advance whatever issue they’re liberal on.

    I live in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, 90% Democratic, and can tell you there isn’t a big pro-union sentiment here, in fact many who live here relocated from somewhere where they were taught unions are bad, but they’re Democrats because they’re either gay, pro-gay rights, pro-abortion rights, anti-war, or environmentalists.

    Some of that won’t fly in Western Pennsylvania where they’re just Democrats because they want to protect unions rights.

    It’s conflicting.  

  70. It’s very conflicting, I guess that’s a downside of being a big tent party. Too many voices being shouted to make everyone happy.

Comments are closed.