Photo credit: AP/Charlie Neibergall

Rich Lowry, the author of the article, is what passes for a mainstream, establishment "conservative" these days, but he's right on the money with his premise here regarding the 2024 presidential election:

Both [Democrats and Republicans] are seeking the same thing -- Trump as the Republican nominee, either so he can sweep to victory (Trump's view) or be beaten again and pay the price for his crimes (the Democrats' view). [Emphasis added, to highlight the primary objective.]

Tags:

Donald Trump 2024 No! Wait! Now we want him OFF the ballot!

Photo credit: Getty Images

The reason is because the liberal Ass-pen Democrat whom Boebert narrowly defeated in 2022 is back for another run at her, and has been given a ton of money so far (probably a good deal of it from "Republicans"), with plenty more to come.

Some folks probably picture Boebert's mostly-rural Colorado district as being one where the people all wear flannel shirts, carry hunting rifles.... and vote Republican. In fact Colorado's 3rd congressional district is now over 26% Hispanic (Boebert did especially poorly in the Mexican counties) and it gave Donald Trump just 51% of the vote in 2020. Analysts even aside from the usual haters on the left marvel at Boebert's unpopularity in what they erroneously believe is a "red" district, but it seems that Trump must be exactly as unpopular as Boebert because they are both 51%-ers here now, at best.

Trump did do better in CO-3 back in 2016, just like everywhere else, before the plandemic made vote fraud so much easier for Democrats, but neither Trump nor Boebert qualifies as truly popular with a majority of voters, fraud or no fraud.

Anyone who inspires a lot of enthusiasm on the GOP side will ALWAYS generate an equal or greater amount of hate among the Rats and the media, and that fact is apparent in the vote totals.

This is a marginal district now whether anyone wants to admit it or not, and barely "red" at all. The Rats have been going all out against Boebert since she took office and she's done well to survive this long. "Independents" vote in the GOP primary (as permitted by Colorado law) in order to support her opponent. That trick didn't work in 2022, but the general was very close and always will be for her.

Despite the tribe of media-controllers gleefully publicizing her recent catfight with MTG, who is another one on the liberals' Most Hated List, we need both of them in Congress -- and many more like them -- since they have more balls (not literally; they're not transvestite Democrats) than nearly any other GOP reps.

But any incumbent getting massively outspent this early in a campaign in a marginal district is in serious trouble, period. It doesn't mean Boebert automatically loses in '24, but nobody should be so naive as to think she's remotely safe.

The funny thing is that CO-3 was moved ever so slightly to the right in the most recent redistricting, greatly disappointing the Boebert haters in both parties. However that minor adjustment is not nearly enough to create a safe environment for Boebert or any Republican. A typical Republican should be favored here, by just a little, but it will always be in the toss-up range. Particularly for GOP candidates designated as "controversial" by the Democrat media. A RINO might get 55% here now, or that approach may backfire as voters pick a real liberal instead of the wannabe liberal; a conservative is going to have to work hard for their 51%.

Tags:

Colorado U.S. House Lauren Boebert

Photo credit: The Hill

For a suddenly relevant blast from the not-too-distant past, here's an excerpt from our very own "Final 2022 election predictions" posted last November 7th:

If partisan control hangs in the balance, i.e. if Republicans end up with a 51-49 majority, the filthy whore from Alaska (who will win re-election easily), will sell herself to the highest bidder like all filthy whores do; that high bidder will be the Democrats. A la Judas Jim Jeffords 20 years ago, Murkowski will switch sides and give the Democrats control.

With the "red wave" petering out completely, there was no need for the dessicated crone from Alaska to pull a Jeffords at that time. However it appears that Murkowski along with other spineless weasels (Cornyn, Thune, Romney, etc.) now fear that the GOP might somehow take Senate control following the 2024 elections, and as always they would greatly prefer not to be in power -- at least not on the same side as those smelly conservatives, and especially not if taking control in January of 2025 is due to the fact that 1 or 2 more actual conservatives are elected next November. So Murkowski is hinting that she will bolt, and it's quite possibly not just a bluff.

She doesn't have to face the voters again until 2028, and Rigged Choice Voting in Alaska practically ensures her re-election just as it did in 2022.

The Democrats don't need to buy off this whore with their endless supply of geld -- she's already a millionaire -- but through their control of the media they can make her the greatest American hero since St. George Floyd; why, she would be single-handedly saving Democracy!!! They don't need to appeal to her greed; they can simply appeal to her gigantic ego and lust for power (or at least relevance).

Regarding the 2024 Senate elections, the puppetmasters have little to fear in West Virginia where a moderate Republican will replace an allegedly moderate Democrat. But if the uniparty establishment loses control of the primary election in places like Montana and Ohio, leading to the nomination of right-of-center candidates like Rosendale and Moreno, and then loses control of the general election and those guys somehow get past all the obstacles in their path (vote fraud, overwhelming funding disadvantages) then they figure that spells DISASTER.

For the establishment.

Of course that's not true at all, with Mitch McConnell or one of his Bitches becoming Majority Leader and being as vigorous, forceful and effective a "leader" as Frank Luntz's boy toy currently is in the House.

Speaking of Kevin McCarthy, the current odds heavily favor him handing over the Speaker's gavel to the racist Democrat election-denier from Brooklyn when the next Congress convenes in 2025, so it would be nice to have the GOP control the Senate. It would be even nicer for them to actually accomplish something with that control, but probably the most we could expect is preventing President Biden, President Harris or President Newsom from being able to pack the Supreme Court. Maybe.

Tags:

Senate RINO Lisa Murkowski Mitt Romney John Cornyn Judas Jim Jeffords

Photo credit: Bloomberg Government

The first paragraph of the article, mainly telling us what we already knew:

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT), chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, have been working for months to recruit the most electable candidates in must-win swing states to retake the majority next year.

"Electable" of course means "someone who is a moderate/liberal toady for Mitch McConnell, like Steve Daines is". The liberal Republican establishment is sticking to the lie that the only reason why the GOP isn't in control of the Senate today is because of all the supposedly flawed candidates who lost in states like Arizona, Georgia, New Hampshire and Pennsylvania during the failed "red wave" of 2022. Add in other states such as Nevada which were ripe for a pickup and a couple more ridiculous pipe dreams (Colorado, Washington) and some lunatics seriously expected a GOP majority of something like 10 seats right now, 55-45 or so.

The party seeks to make sure that only approved Mitch Bitches get on the ticket for 2024, and no more "flawed" conservatives. When that strategy fails next November, the GOPe excuse will be that conservative voters didn't do their job and let the party down.

Here's a howler from the article, regarding Montana:

The establishment has "coalesced around former Navy SEAL Tim Sheehy's candidacy while privately dissuading Rep. Matt Rosendale from throwing his hat in the ring. Sheehy has the backing of Daines and Gov. Greg Gianforte (R-MT), while Rosendale has the backing of the well-funded Club for Growth despite not being in the race yet. Party establishment has said that Rosendale's 2018 loss to Tester proves he cannot win statewide."

Then the party establishment consists of idiots, liars, or both. You see, Rosendale, who is a far more conservative option than Squish Sheehy, in fact DID WIN STATEWIDE in Montana in 2020, by nearly 14 points against a very well-funded liberal Democrat to boot.

The article goes on to note that the GOPe is "staying out" of the primary in Ohio -- because they can easily see that the right-ish primary vote will be split between Secretary of State Frank LaRose and MAGA conservative Bernie Moreno, allowing liberal state Senator Matt Dolan to prevail by getting the primary votes of many Democrat infiltrators who will never vote for him in the general. Why should the GOPe interfere when things are going so well for them? You should already be well aware of the liberal machinations in West Virginia, with the GOP backstabbing conservative Rep. Alex Mooney in favor of doddering moderate Governor Jim Justice.

Now back to the "bad candidate" lie of 2022. True that the quality of some of the GOP candidates was less than great (Oz leaps to mind), but it's also been true for a long time that the GOPe will ensure that candidates it doesn't approve of (conservatives) will not succeed in general elections, and the best way to do that is to fail to support those candidates with $$$$ and thereby concede massive financial advantages to the Democrats.

Check this out from the key swing state Senate races in 2022:

Arizona: D spending, $192 million; R spending, $15 million

Georgia: D: $326 million; R: $69 million

Nevada: D: $64 million; R: $18 million

New Hampshire: D: $42 million; R: $4 million

Pennsylvania: D: $76 million; R: $49 million

Even in states the GOP won (barely) in 2022, Democrats still had massive spending margins over their Republican opponents; the Rats made sure that their ultra-liberal Senate candidates in Wisconsin and North Carolina didn't have to rely solely on their melanin advantages, and therefore they also had far more resources to work with than Ron Johnson or Ted Budd. In Ohio, J.D. Vance was outspent by close to 300% (!), but then Ohio isn't supposed to be a swing state so the Democrats theoretically needed to pump in tremendous cash just to have a fighting chance. Ohio will obviously be a lot tighter in 2024 than it was in 2022, and this time all that Democrat cash will be critical.

Looking at the financial picture as it is developing for the 2024 Senate races, in every state where the GOP can even dream of making a pickup -- including West Virginia -- the incumbent Democrat is starting out far ahead in the money race. Even where there isn't a Democrat incumbent who is running again (Michigan) the liberals are still miles ahead in geld. With it still being so early in the campaign season, perhaps that's not the most meaningful way to evaluate electoral chances because incumbents always start out far ahead.

Oh yeah?

The loony left has at most only two semi-realistic possibilities of taking a Senate seat from the Republicans in 2024 and in one of those -- Texas -- GOP incumbent Ted Cruz is already trailing his dumb-as-dirt opponent in fundraising, and that trend is likely to continue through 2024. The Democrats are laser-beam focused on taking Texas because once it finally flips from true blue to commie pinko red, any Republican has a 0.0% chance of ever winning another presidential election. Since the Rats can't make their presidential candidate (presumably Biden, for now) attractive to Texans, they are sinking tons of cash into the Senate race in the hopes that the coattail effect will work up the ticket as well as down.

Tags:

Senate 2024 Montana Ohio West Virginia Democrat mega-$$$$ advantage

Photo credit: Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

You'll remember Flores from June of 2022 when she scored a historic upset victory in a heavily-Mexican south Texas district (CD-34) which had never before been won by anything other than a Democrat. The old version of the 34th district in which Flores won that 4-way special election 13 months ago was pretty much a tossup and had trended slightly to the right as of 2020. Special elections are always prone to fluke outcomes due to low turnout, but the flukes usually favor the left. This one didn't.

When a Democrat wins a fluke special election, the party normally goes all-in to see that the fluke outcome becomes the "new normal" outcome and they quite often succeed; examples abound in recent decades. A Republican who registers a win like that is rare enough and holding the seat for more than a few months is even rarer, so what happened in TX-34 last November was anything but a shock when Flores lost to a well-funded Democrat by 7½ points.

As to the facts about this area, the current version of the 34th district in which Flores lost the general election in November of 2022 was moved about 5 points to the left -- by Republicans -- in redistricting. That's why Democrat Vicente Gonzalez, who was the incumbent in the adjacent 15th district, packed up his carpetbag and slithered over to the new 34th. The new 15th district was moved 2 or 3 points to the right and the GOP did pick that one up last November and hopefully will be able to hold it in the future.

Texas has no party registration but the current 34th is probably somewhere around 2 to 1, or worse, in favor of Democrats. Some of those D's occasionally vote R (slightly more so now than in the past); most do not.

Tags:

Mayra Flores Texas U.S. House Historic upset Redistricting

Photo credit: Matt York, Associated Press

"The Hill", of all sources, contends that every one of the five most allegedly endangered Senate seats up in 2024 are currently held by Democrats! The five are: West Virginia, Montana, Ohio, Arizona and Wisconsin. We know that's hardly wishful thinking on the part of that leftist site, but are these pickups actually realistic or is this just a lot of crocodile tears to go with the veiled warning to Democrats to get busy doing whatever is necessary (wink, wink) to keep those seats, especially with Senate control at risk?

West Virginia: is supposed to be a slam-dunk pickup, perhaps with Joe "I've never lost an election in my life" Manchin deciding to keep his record intact by failing to run again and making the pickup a 100% certainty. The GOPe firmly supports moderate Governor Jim Justice and will do whatever it takes to prevent conservative Alex Mooney from getting the nomination. If Manchin really is as much of a "centrist" as some folks claim, the transition from Manchin to Justice in the Senate probably won't be very noticeable when it comes to their voting records.

Montana: The GOPe is rallying behind businessman Tim Sheehy, which probably tells you everything you need to know about this newcomer's politics. The question remains as to whether 2018 candidate and current congressman Matt Rosendale will enter the race. The Republicans lost Montana in 2018 for the same reason they lost West Virginia -- their candidate was attacked for the crime of not being born in the state (that plus some other Dirty Democrat Tricks, particularly in Montana). If Rosendale tries again in 2024 he'll do better than 2018, but he might be too conservative for his party's establishment.

Ohio: The GOP doesn't even appear to have a viable candidate. State Senator Matt Dolan is a liberal who got barely 20% of the vote in the 2022 Republican Senate primary, most of those votes coming from Democrats; Bernie Moreno is trying to paint himself as the MAGA candidate a la J.D. Vance, and will probably get a Trump endorsement if he can demonstrate a substantial lead in the polls. Ohio is not the solidly Republican state that the hopium addicts wish it was. For proof of that statement look no further than Sherrod Brown's past electoral successes, including 2018 when we were assured that Brown was toast because Trump won Ohio in 2016. Oops.

Arizona: Republicans can always count on a fair election in Arizona of course (LOL) but even if that really was the case their only hope here is for a 3-way race between the slimy "independent" incumbent (Sinema) a really slimy Democrat congressman (Gallego) and whoever the GOP nominates; that way the Republican could win with merely a plurality of the vote, and a plurality is probably the best they can do in this state these days. Some believe that Kari Lake will be back for a repeat of 2022. She was too good to be allowed to win then, and the same applies now. Whether it takes threats, bribes or both, Independent Sinema may not even choose to run for re-election, clearing the field for the Democrat nominee to very likely prevail next November.

Wisconsin: Rebecca Kleefisch, who would probably be Governor right now if it weren't for Trump's misguided and ineffectual endorsement of proven loser Tim Michels in 2022, would be a very good candidate and former Milwaukee County sheriff David Clarke would be good as well. Unfortunately, the GOPe is far more interested in millionaire candidates who will spend their own funds and not waste the apparently limited amount of cash the party has to throw around this cycle ("Pleez send us munney!"). Better still for the GOPe, the typical millionaire-type candidate often tends to be a squish although in this case Wisconsin venture capitalist Eric Hovde is described as a "conservative activist", at least by those on the left who hate him. So maybe he's not bad, but any Republican starts off as a clear underdog here.


Other possibilities, but don't hold your breath: There's Michigan, where incumbent liberal Debbie Stabenow is retiring in 2024 and will likely be replaced by well-funded liberal congresswoman Elissa Slotkin. There are a lot of GOP possibles to take her on, but none of them are serious threats to win. Except perhaps former Detroit police chief James Craig, who tried to run for Governor in 2022 but made the rookie mistake of having Democrat operatives in disguise gather signatures for him, which were deliberately falsified and Craig was kicked off the primary ballot at the last minute, leaving nothing but a field of underfunded and outclassed twerps on the Republican side. Hopefully he'll be smarter this time around.

Then there's Nevada, where the current Democrat Senator barely got 50% in 2018 against former Republican incumbent Dean Heller, who ran screaming to the left in a failed effort to keep that seat. The string-pullers on rare occasions allow the GOP to win a close election in Nevada (e.g. 2022 Governor) when the Republican candidate is acceptable to the left. If Sam Brown or Jim Marchant becomes the Senate nominee: (a) either one would make a great Senator, therefore (b) that is not going to be one of the few times the puppetmasters will allow the Republicans to win a statewide general election in Nevada although the result would likely be close. The GOP could simply nominate an eternal loser such as Adam Laxalt or Danny Tarkanian again, at least that would remove any suspense regarding the outcome.

Tags:

Senate 2024 West Virginia Slam dunk Montana Ohio Arizona Wisconsin Wishful thinking Michigan Nevada

Photo credit: AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana

The article states, quite accurately, that a "prior left-wing court invented out of whole cloth a constitutional provision that forced the legislature to create so-called fair districts."

Last November the voters in North Carolina delivered a 5-2 Republican majority to the state Supreme Court, and today that court came through by not merely overturning the illegal judicial interference with last year's redistricting, but also restoring a voter ID law which was duly passed by the voters in 2018 before being thrown out by partisan Democrat judges.

This is all great news, although the hyperventilating in the article about the GOP picking up 4 House seats in the Tarheel State in 2024 after the maps are redrawn is not terribly realistic, however a gain of 2 or even 3 might be. On the flip side of the coin, Democrats in New York are suing because they were not allowed to implement the most ridiculously partisan gerrymander (with all due respect to Illinois) in the entire nation. The lawsuit seeks to restore that gerrymander or something very close -- if not worse.

Many of the series of fluke U.S. House victories the GOP attained in New York in 2022 -- CD-3 (Santos), CD-4 (D'Esposito), CD-17 (Lawler), CD-19 (Molinaro) and CD-22 (Williams) -- were likely to be undone in 2024 even without a new gerrymander, plus CD-1 (LaLota) and CD-11 (Malliotakis) aren't exactly 100% safe either; Malliotakis may appear safe due to the margin she received in 2022, but that's only because the Democrats ran a complete stooge against her and they will not make that mistake again.

If the Democrats prevail in New York court, it will offset the presumed North Carolina gains, and more.

Adverse changes will also be coming to the district map in Ohio and possibly other states, with South Carolina as another example. If those changes in Ohio are not implemented for the 2024 election then they definitely will be by 2026. Republicans expected to pick up 2 House seats in 2022 in Ohio while maybe sacrificing one seat (that sacrifice was pretty much mandated by liberal court order when the court rejected the Republicans' original Ohio map); what actually happened was that the Republicans picked up nothing while losing one seat, as the much ballyhooed (and mis-named) "red wave" became not even a trickle, though at least they held the U.S. Senate seat with J.D. Vance.

Because the expected gains never materialized, even a less favorable district map might do little or no damage to the composition of the Ohio congressional delegation, in which the Republicans currently hold a 10-5 edge.

Tags:

North Carolina Redistricting Democrat gerrymander overturned New York Democrat gerrymander restored

Photo credit: AP Photo/Susan Walsh

Actually, that's one thing he's not. The article claims that Manchin is regretting his high-profile vote which singlehandedly provided the margin for passage of the Democrats' ludicrously-named "Inflation Reduction Act" last August. But he knew exactly what he was doing at the time, and only now that the 2024 campaign season is beginning to get underway is Manchin feeling a little heat at home in West Virginia. He pretends to be a thorn in the side of his party, but when the chips are down he always comes through for the leftists.

Republicans are lining up to take Manchin on, the first one was solidly conservative representative Alex Mooney. The liberal GOP establishment therefore went into a panic, but calmed themselves down by successfully recruiting term-limited Democrat-turned-Republican Governor Jim Justice to oppose Mooney in the primary.

The RINOs and their big $$$$ donors are now able to run away from Mooney and toward Justice. Donald Trump should endorse Mooney to give Mooney's campaign some traction, but apparently that's too much of a risk to the all-important Trump Winning Percentage since Mooney is unlikely to survive the primary.

Aside from his conservatism, the RINOs' problem with Mooney is that he wasn't born in some rural hovel in the geographical center of West Virginia and therefore is doomed to always be considered an outsider like Patrick Morrissey was painted as when he ran against Manchin and lost -- basically for that reason alone -- in 2018. Morrissey has since been elected to statewide office in WV, and is running for Governor in '24 and will probably win, so the voters seem to have forgiven him for the sin of being born elsewhere. Will the voters also forgive Mooney? We very likely won't get to find out this year.

The fear is that Manchin and the media would use the same playbook against Mooney that they did against Morrissey. They also fear that Mooney is "unelectable" even in this bluest of blue states because they feel (and wish, and try their best to ensure) that all conservatives are unelectable.

It's a moot point because no way the establishment lets Mooney win the GOP primary if Justice is in the race, and maybe even if he isn't. Given that Justice will be the nominee, at this time we feel he has about a 60-40 chance of defeating Manchin. Manchin is as slimy as they come, but West Virginia voters have been fooled by him in the past and may be again in the future. Also Manchin is a good campaigner -- good enough, anyway -- and most Republicans are not. Justice won in 2016 (as a Democrat, prior to switching parties) by "only" 7 points, but the next truly tough election campaign he faces will be his first one.

If something from way out of left field happens and Mooney is the nominee, it wouldn't be surprising at all to see the state's other Senator (alleged Republican Shelley Capito) all but endorse Manchin by talking about how delighted she's been to serve with him, how wonderfully "bipartisan" he is, etc. Other RINOs will also pull out the knives and aim for Mooney's back; Mitch McConnell will see to it that Mooney is starved for funds. But as stated above, that scenario is very likely something we won't have to worry about.

Tags:

Phony "moderate" Joe Manchin West Virginia 2024 Alex Mooney Conservative Jim Justice RINO

Photo credit: Brad Wilson

From the article: "Utah House Speaker Brad Wilson announced he was forming an exploratory committee 14 months before the scheduled primary. Utah needs a 'conservative fighter' who represents its values, not a 'professional career politician,' Wilson told The Associated Press in an interview at his real estate office in northern Utah."

In what clown world is Brad Wilson a "conservative fighter", or a conservative at all? Even if you aren't aware of his moderate (at best) voting record, here's another clue: he wouldn't be Speaker of the Utah House if he really was a conservative; the GOP caucus of squishes in the Utah House wouldn't support that any more than the U.S. House GOP squishes would support someone like Andy Biggs over Kevin McCarthy.

Wilson's probably not as bad as Slick Willard though, and at a minimum would do less damage in the Senate than Romney does. Should Wilson happen to pull off the upset, then as a freshman backbencher at least he wouldn't go sucking up to the hosts of the left-wing Sunday morning TV "news" shows in order to trash conservative members of his own party on a regular basis.

Even though this is allegedly rock-ribbed Republican Utah we're talking about, it is an open question as to whether an actual conservative -- as opposed to a RINO -- can even get elected statewide here anymore, as the Salt Lake City area is well on its way to becoming the "New Austin" (Texas) due to significant Californication and the massive influx of liberals from other states as well. Salt Lake County, which has finally flipped from true blue to Commie red, casts over one-third of the votes in the state.

Senator Mike Lee, an alleged conservative, is portrayed by Utah lefties as being well to the right of Jesse Helms (not even close), and in 2022 Lee barely cleared 50% statewide against a joke candidate who only got votes on the basis of not being Mike Lee, as opposed to anything positive. Lee was beaten by nearly 20 points in Salt Lake County.

Tags:

Senate 2024 Utah Mitt Romney Brad Wilson Salt Lake City

Photo credit: Thom Bridge, Independent Record

This bill has not yet become law, but Democrats are already howling with outrage because Republicans in Montana are attempting to craft an election law which exactly matches the ones used -- to great Democrat benefit -- in states such as California and Washington. Except this time the benefit, tiny though it may be, would accrue to the GOP. Hence the hypocritical outrage from the left.

The idea is to make the November, 2024 U.S. Senate election a 1-on-1 race with no interference from minor party candidates. Tester has won three times previously, with percentages of 49.2% in 2006, 48.6% in 2012, and 50.3% in 2018. In all 3 cases, the candidacy of a Libertarian was engineered in order to cost the GOP candidate enough votes to lose the election. It worked perfectly twice, and even in 2018 when Tester finally got over 50% the Libertarian eventually discovered how he was being used and manipulated, and he withdrew from the race and endorsed the Republican. But he bailed out too late to affect the outcome.

There remains the little matter of determining who the GOP nominee will be in 2024. The filing deadline is still 11 months away so there's plenty of time, however no serious Republican has as yet entered the race. One or both of the state's U.S. House incumbents (Zinke, Rosendale) probably will file. So too may some others who already hold statewide office.

Because there will be only one primary ballot instead of separate ones for each party if this law passes, Democrats will not so easily be able to utilize their effective scheme from 2022 in which leftist voters invade the Republican primary (as they did in Colorado, for example) to try to help the weakest candidates prevail.

Even with one or more good candidates running for the GOP -- preferably only one -- liberals may resort to old tricks such as placing bogus "conservatives" on the primary ballot in order to split the right-wing vote and ensure that the most liberal of the big-names becomes the Republican nominee; this obviously creates as much of a win-win scenario for the left as possible. Democrats won't have to sabotage conservatives all by themselves; the GOP establishment will be happy to take charge of that particular task.

Tags:

Senate 2024 Montana Jon Tester No more Libertarian assistance?

So the GOP held (not gained) a state Senate seat in Wisconsin which for now gives the Republicans a supermajority and therefore gives the party license to do all kinds of great things like impeach Democrats -- as if the Senate RINOs won't chicken out and backstab conservatives at the first sign of anything "controversial". Even one defection renders the supermajority impotent.

Before those of us on the right get any more drunk on all the champagne we've consumed celebrating this wonderful event, perhaps we should sober up and consider what is to stop the true winners on Tuesday -- Wisconsin Democrats -- from using their new-found control of the state Supreme Court to:

a.   Stop anything and everything the Republican supermajority eventually works up the courage (ha) to attempt and, far more importantly....

b.   Arbitrarily invalidate the district maps for the state Assembly, state Senate and Congressional districts and then replace those maps with hyper-partisan Democrat gerrymanders?

Not only will those gerrymanders result in "Goodbye, Republican supermajority" but very likely also "Goodbye, any Republican majority at all". It may also result in two Congressional districts flipping from R to D as well: CD-1 and CD-3.

Who's going to stop them? As those of us here in Pennsylvania found out in 2018 and again in 2022 under similar circumstances, the "law" is whatever a Democrat-controlled Court says it is, and all the Republican party can (or will) do is bend over and take it.

Seeing as how the Democrats campaigned on doing exactly what is stated in item "b" if they won the Supreme Court election -- which they did, in a "landslide" -- can anyone explain why they somehow won't do it?

Tags:

Wisconsin 2023 Supreme Court Special election Adios, GOP control

Photo credit: Jeenah Moon / Bloomberg via Getty Images

The government wishes to add numerous politically correct categories to their already-flawed laundry list of races, but there are only three biological races: Caucasoid, Negroid and Mongoloid. Always trust the science! Or doesn't that apply to liberal bureaucrats?

Even now the government additionally claims the existence of "races" like Native American, Alaska Native, Pacific Islander and of course Other. Just what the hell would Other be? Klingon?

Then there's the relatively new (as of the 2000 Census) category of "2+ races" or, more accurately, allowing respondents to select as many different races as they desire to identify themselves. Seeing as how the leftist puppetmasters/media-controllers began in the 1990s their ceaseless campaign for miscegenation, that category had to be officially added as of 2000 so they could measure their progress.

Nevermind that at least as of the 2020 Census if not earlier, those multi-racial figures are MASSIVELY inflated -- coincidentally by almost the exact proportion that the White category has allegedly declined. You can see the evidence for yourself on this very website by looking at the breakdowns for practically any city, county, state or metro area in the nation.

Despite all that, anyone who advocates complete removal of the Race question on the Census, as some do, is an idiot. The purpose of the Census is to gather important information about the population. And if someone doesn't think race qualifies as demographically important no matter how the Bureau of the Census bastardizes the definition, then he/she/it (just wait until you see how the Bureau handles "gender" in 2030 if not sooner) is an even greater idiot.

Now as to things that information on race is used for -- such as discriminating against certain races in college admissions, and for any number of other discriminatory purposes by governments and liberal institutions -- that's a different story. There are good reasons to be color-blind in many instances, but being totally ignorant of racial demographics is the height of stupidity, and in some cases is quite dangerous.

Tags:

Demographics Census Racial categories

From the article:

"The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee announced on Friday 29 members it is placing in its front-line program aimed at helping incumbent lawmakers in swing districts retain their seats as the party looks to flip back control of the lower chamber in 2024. The list includes familiar names from swing districts during the 2022 cycle, in which Democrats exceeded pollsters' and political forecasters' projections by fending off a red wave. Democrats will once again have to protect their seats and pick up five more to retake the House next year."

Half of the Democrats who are mentioned are freshmen and the other half are liberal incumbents who are too far left for their marginal districts, regardless of how much these Democrats pretend to be "moderate" around election time.

The Democrat representatives who are said to be most vulnerable:
(from the linked article)

Mary Peltola (AK)
Mike Levin (CA)
Yadira Caraveo (CO)
Jahana Hayes (CT)
Nikki Budzinski (IL)
Eric Sorensen (IL)
Frank Mrvan (IN)
Sharice Davids (KS)
Jared Golden (ME)
Hillary Scholten (MI)
Dan Kildee (MI)
Angie Craig (MN)
Don Davis (NC)
Wiley Nickel (NC)
Chris Pappas (NH)
Gabriel Vasquez (NM)
Susie Lee (NV)
Steven Horsford (NV)
Pat Ryan (NY)
Greg Landsman (OH)
Marcy Kaptur (OH)
Emilia Sykes (OH)
Andrea Salinas (OR)
Susan Wild (PA)
Matt Cartwright (PA)
Chris Deluzio (PA)
Abigail Spanberger (VA)
Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (WA)
Kim Schrier (WA)

It's going to take a much better performance from the GOP than we saw in 2022 to dislodge most of those; otherwise pretty much all of them are fairly safe; just not AS safe as other Democrats.

Coincidentally, we count just about exactly the same number of vulnerable Republicans in the House. Neither of these two lists of marignal districts are exhaustive, but the 60 or so races that are highlighted will be the major battlegrounds in 2024, while about 95% of the other 375 districts will be as competitive as they usually are (i.e., not at all).

As with the Democrat list, half of the Republicans shown below are newly-elected and the other half are incumbents in districts that could swing either way. If all goes as expected -- which it never does, in case you have already forgotten the alleged GOP "wave" that instead trickled down to almost nothing in 2022 -- we'd forecast a win in approximately half of these, which means a net change of not very much in the House. But "not very much" is all that's needed for the Republicans to lose their narrow edge here. In our opinion the names which follow are, on average, in greater danger of losing in 2024 than most of the 29 Democrats enumerated above, though political conditions may change substantially in the next 18 months.

We anticipate these GOP representatives to be most heavily targeted in '24:

David Schweikert (AZ)
Juan Ciscomani (AZ)
John Duarte (CA)
David Valadao (CA)
Mike Garcia (CA)
Young Kim (CA)
Ken Calvert (CA)
Michelle Steel (CA)
Lauren Boebert (CO)
Anna Paulina Luna (FL) -- she'll probably get slimed in the primary too since the GOPe squishes hate her
Any of the 4 GOP incumbents (except Feenstra) in Iowa
Andy Harris (MD)
John James (MI)
Brad Finstad (MN)
Ann Wagner (MO)
Ryan Zinke (MT)
Don Bacon (NE)
Tom Kean Jr. (NJ)
George Santos (NY)
Anthony D'Esposito (NY)
Mike Lawler (NY)
Marc Molinaro (NY)
Brandon Williams (NY) New York could be a real bloodbath in 2024, as bad as California.
Lori Chavez-DeRemer (OR)
Scott Perry (PA)
Monica de la Cruz (TX)
Tony Gonzales (TX) he'll be challenged by a conservative in the primary, which is good; Gonzales is garbage.
Jen Kiggans (VA)

As it gets closer to 2024 we'll be keeping an eye on the quality of opponents these representatives get and the amount of $$$$ the combatants come up with; chances are the level of competition will be high and Democrats will spare no expense -- not only playing defense for their 29 most endangered liberals, but playing serious offense in their quest to take back control of the entire federal government.

Tags:

U.S. House 2024 Vulnerable incumbents

Photo credit: iStock

Nothing unexpected here -- people are moving to the usual destinations (Texas, Florida, the rest of the Sun Belt) and fleeing from pathological liberal areas, especially California which has had net domestic outmigration for three decades now and led the nation again in escapees in 2022.

We often hear anecdotal BS -- worth about as much as trying to predict election outcomes from yard signs, or the opinions of a person's tiny circle of friends -- along the lines of "My new neighbor who just moved here from [California, New York, Illinois, or whatever liberal state] is a true conservative! I was shocked!" -- but it's really nothing more than selection bias. If you live in a decent area, then chances are that many of the new neighbors you get are decent people too.

Texas is a prime target for Californication although liberals from other states clearly target it as well. Texans who live in good communities may marvel at how conservative the recent immigrants from liberal states are, but if you go somewhere like Austin (notice all the California license plates?) and ask those natives what they think of the massive influx of new arrivals, they'll surely tell you how fantastic it is that so many new like-minded liberals are arriving in Texas daily and transforming the state from blue (proper color usage) to purple.

Who is right? Well, lets see:

Texas election results

At the presidential level, in the early 2000s the state was 10-12% more Republican than the national average even when there wasn't a Bush on the ticket. In 2016 and 2020 Texas was only 5 or 6% more Republican than the national average. The same declining pattern applies to other statewide elections in Texas, so it's not just a "Trump effect" -- and that's even with rural Hispanics supposedly moving toward the GOP.

So who is causing the decline? Blacks? Nah, they're already as far left as possible. Urban Hispanics? Ditto. The answer, to a significant extent, is White invaders -- from states like California. It's been an open question for years as to how long before Texas flips to the dark side. Within a few years we'll be looking back, surprised it held out as long as it did. Obviously, without Texas there is no viable "path to 270" for any GOP presidential candidate.

Tags:

Demographics Voting with their feet Texas Californication

We were told one year ago that the magnificent GOP sweep in Virginia in 2021 was largely the result of learning from the nationwide debacle of 2020 and having GOP poll watchers everywhere in order to minimize Democrat vote fraud. Furthermore, that "Virginia model" for ensuring election integrity was going to be implemented nationwide, and no longer would the Democrats so easily be able to commit massive statewide fraud in places like Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, etc.

Oops.

Like Trump's win in 2016, Youngkin's win in 2021 was very much a fluke and had little to nothing to do with suddenly vigilant Republican poll watchers:

1. Both Trump and Youngkin had the luxury of facing the single most repugnant and unpopular Democrat available at the time (Hillary Clinton, Terry McAuliffe).

2. Democrats took both Republican candidates less than 100% seriously and therefore committed just a wee bit less fraud than usual.

3. That overconfidence was costly to the Democrats, and still the Republicans just barely managed to win.

Pick whatever reason you like to explain the outcome (fraud and demographics are two good candidates), but 2025 in Virginia is very likely to look like 2020 did nationwide -- the glorious victory of 4 years prior is almost certain to be reversed. Youngkin of course cannot run again since Virginia prohibits consecutive terms for the same Governor.

As far as what happened in Tuesday's election, nobody aside from leftist media gloaters who are simply trying to damage Youngkin can hold him mainly responsible for the razor-thin GOP loss in a marginal state Senate district. But at the same time Youngkin is clearly no king-maker either, any more than Trump has been.

Tags:

Virginia Special election State Senate Glenn Youngkin