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

Photo credit: Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call

And so it begins.

We warned you months ago regarding redistricting that "The battle (just like counting votes in a close election) often never ends until the Democrat wins, and several lawsuits are still pending which, if successful, would result in Democrat gains."

Now, a trio of ultra-liberal Democrat judges have mystically divined the "intent" of Republicans who drew the new district lines in South Carolina and, what a surprise, they have arbitrarily decided that those Republicans were "racist"! To these black-robed tyrants, this alleged racism means that the Republican-created district map is invalid and therefore must be redrawn in order to give the Democrats the best possible chance of flipping at least one South Carolina congressional district in 2024 and beyond.

Democrat racists will hardly be content to mandate a new Democrat gerrymander in just this state alone, and so you better get ready for similar actions in numerous other states -- pretty much any other state in which Republicans controlled the redistricting process. OTOH, you need not be concerned about Republican lawsuits (if any even exist) attempting to overturn hyper-partisan Democrat gerrymanders in places such as Illinois, California, Oregon, New Jersey, Massachusetts, New Mexico, etc.

Any GOP lawsuits which might someday arise in places like those will be quickly dismissed for "lack of standing" -- with perhaps one exception. The U.S. Supreme Court agreed a few months ago to eventually hear arguments that Democrat judges had illegally seized the redistricting process in North Carolina from the rightful control of the GOP legislature (which is exactly what those judges did). This has Democrats slightly concerned that their similar illegal power plays might be jeopardized elsewhere, but there is no evidence of this yet and the Democrats' partisan gerrymander in North Carolina still exists for now.

Tags:

U.S. House South Carolina Judicial gerrymandering

Photo credit: 11alive.com

Despite the adverse electoral outcomes over the past several months in Alaska, there's still a lot of ignorance on the right regarding the beneficial effect of Rigged Choice Voting (RCV) on liberal candidates of both parties and, as we predicted months ago, emboldened liberals are now trying to foist this scheme anywhere they think they can get away with it, focusing mainly on marginal states like Nevada and Georgia or solidly Republican ones like Utah, but never on Democrat states -- why mess with success?

If you're still clueless as to how Rigged Choice Voting works, and why those who hate and fear conservatives are so ga-ga about it, then be sure to read this.

Leftists are currently ramping up their efforts to get RCV mandated in the three states mentioned above, and possibly elsewhere; for example, the RINO squish Governor of Missouri is well-known to want this for his state in order to marginalize conservative opposition. In Georgia, the most likely target of Benedict Raffensperger's machinations can be described in 3 letters: MTG. Solidly conservative congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene represents a solidly Republican district in northwest Georgia. She easily achieves at least 50% of the vote in any 2-way race against a Democrat. Even a helpful Democrat puppet candidate running as a Libertarian and making it a 3-way race wouldn't steal enough votes to get Greene below 50%.

But if Georgia forces through the Alaska version of Rigged Choice Voting, there will be a four-way race in November of 2024 and that outcome will look a lot like what happened in Alaska in 2022. Greene will not get to 50%, and she will end up playing the same role as Sarah Palin did twice in Alaska in 2022 -- the role of loser. Democrats will make sure to have only one candidate on the ballot, while RINOs will line up behind a Republican more to their liking and will therefore split the GOP vote. Even if Greene leads all candidates on the first ballot, she won't get to the required 50% threshold and that means the provisions of Rigged Choice Voting then kick in. When they do, the highly likely outcome is a win-win for the left: either a liberal Democrat or a liberal Republican will be the new congressman from Georgia's 14th district.

Tags:

Georgia Rigged Choice Voting Brad Raffensperger

She'll still caucus with the Democrats, the Democrats control which committees she gets to be on.... this changes nothing except that we now have three liberal stooges in the Senate (Sinema, King, Sanders) who are all really Democrats yet call themselves "independent".

In reality, they are all as dependent on Democrats as they ever were, and in Sinema's case this is simply a calculated move (with full Democrat support) to increase her chances of re-election and nothing more than that.

Only the GOP's abysmal performance in the Senate races in 2022 allows this political transvestite to follow her "conscience" and pretend to leave the Democrat party. If Sinema was the deciding vote as to which party controls the Senate, this little charade would never have occurred.

Tags:

Senate Arizona Kyrsten Sinema Still really a Democrat

Photo credit: abc27.com

Myth #1: Republican Governor Glenn Youngkin gets to appoint a replacement, which means the GOP gains a seat!!!

Fact: Governors never get to make appointments for House vacancies, only Senate vacancies.

Myth #2: OK, then we'll just win the special election!!! We're motivated!!! We're inspired!!!

Fact: Republicans have approximately a 0% chance of winning this D+16 district.

Youngkin at least ought to delay the special election for as long as possible just to forestall the inevitable Democrat win. This district (CD-4) up through 2016 was historically represented by a Republican or by a moderate-to-conservative Democrat (back when conservative or even moderate Democrats actually existed).

This district as currently configured was designed by judicial fiat in 2016, specifically to transfer the seat from Republican to Democrat hands. Republicans thought they had taken care of things in the 2011 redistricting, but a liberal judge told them they were wrong a few years later.

Along those same lines, the 2 states which had the happiest outcomes in the House on November 8th -- Florida and New York -- are both likely to have the same thing done to them as was done in Virginia and also occurred in Florida, North Carolina and Pennsylvania during the past decade: there will be new district maps, mandated by liberal Democrat judges, with the new maps deliberately designed for the sole purpose of flipping as many House seats as possible from R to D under the guise of "racial equality" or something equally fatuous.

Don't be at all surprised if/when it happens; the GOPe better enjoy its "control" of the House while it lasts.

Tags:

U.S. House Virginia Special election 2023

Sorry we've been out of touch for a couple of months (family issues), but here are some realistic predictions for what will happen Tuesday.

Tl;dr version for those with insufficient attention spans or an aversion to being realistic: the delusionals have worked themselves up into such a frenzy that even GOOD news -- Republicans going +15 or +20 and winning the House and maybe picking up a seat or two and perhaps taking control of the Senate -- will be viewed as major disappointments by those who actually believe outlier polls, people who reflexively add 10 points to GOP candidates in polls just because, and people who take ludicrous "predictions" by sources such as Newt Gingrich and Dickie Morris seriously.

Senate:

The most likely reasonable expectation is in the range of GOP -1 to GOP +1. This may sound unimpressive or pessimistic, but then reality IS normally more unimpressive than fantasy. It's not totally pessimistic either: we'll assume that Republicans hold their pair of highly endangered and marginal seats in North Carolina and Wisconsin, outcomes which are very far from certainties.

The most likely path to the -1 to +1 range is: Oz loses PA (which he will, after appearing to be winning substantially on Tuesday night) and the Republicans pick up either 0, 1 or 2 of Nevada and New Hampshire. An upset is possible but Walker will most likely lose in a runoff in Georgia, other races may be close-but-no-cigar (such as Arizona), and only if a 1994-style massacre of Democrats occurs is there any plausible chance for pickups in places like Colorado and Washington. Of the 2 Democrat-held seats which are actually tossups, Nevada is a better bet for GOP success than New Hampshire (even the right-leaning shills at Real Clear Politics have conceded that Bolduc will not win), and Nevada is pretty tenuous.

Final Senate note: 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. If we want REAL control we need to get to 52 somehow.

Governors:

Maryland and Massachusetts are already foregone conclusions to flip from R to D and another significant possibility to do the same thing is Oklahoma. In the end, we'll guess that Stitt wins by an extremely small margin and holds Oklahoma for the GOP.

Among currently D-held seats, Pennsylvania is a lost cause but we predict the Republicans will pick up Nevada; however it better not be too close because Republicans almost never win close elections in Nevada.

Sadly, MAGA heroine Kari Lake will lose in Arizona simply because she cannot be allowed to win; she's too good. If she somehow slips through the cracks in Katie Hobbs' Fraud Machine (it's so cute that people think the Rats can't cheat because "Weer Wotching" more closely than in 2020) and ekes out a win, Lake will not be allowed to govern. Remember Evan Mechem? Lake will be Evan Mechem 2.0. The Democrats, the Democrat media and the RINO elites in Lake's own party will see to it and are probably already preparing for it by fabricating the Kari Lake version of the "Steele Dossier".

All other seats will probably be status quo though there is a decent opportunity for Tim Michels to defeat soyboi Tony Evers in Wisconsin. Republicans will blow it in Kansas, which should have been an easy pickup, and the Oregon pipe dream will turn out to be a pipe bomb as support for the "independent" Democrat who was splitting the D vote has evaporated, and her supporters have flocked back like sheep to the nutzoid D candidate. It was fun while it lasted and the final outcome will be close, but this is Oregon. Other states -- notably New York -- will be much closer than they usually are, but all realistic odds favor Democrat holds in that state and in Maine, Minnesota, Michigan, New Mexico and Colorado. Will Illinois flip, as some seem to believe? That's precious.

House:

The realistic floor for the GOP is somewhere around +10, and that's sufficient to take control but as mentioned above would be considered a crushing disappointment if that's all we get. If we see less than +10, or worse yet we see panicky Democrat predictions of gains coming true, then we know that Democrat fraud is working better than ever.

A sensible outcome without going too far overboard with the purely wishful thinking is GOP +15 to maybe as much as +20 (I know, I know, that's STILL a massive downer); anyone who truly believes, despite no evidence whatsoever, that +50, +75, +100 is viable, will need to up their meds starting Wednesday.

Newly created seats in Florida, Texas (1 of the 2 new seats), Montana and Colorado will go our way, offset by GOP reapportionment losses in places like New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Michigan and West Virginia along with D pickups of new seats in states such as Oregon and North Carolina. Florida will be the biggest win for our side, as the delegation goes from 16-11 in our favor to 20-8. Arizona might see a pickup of 2 House seats for the GOP even as both statewide Republican candidates are being frauded out of their wins.

Democrat incumbents (through defeat on Tuesday, or retirement, or redistricting) will be ousted in Wisconsin, Tennessee, Georgia, New Jersey, Ohio (Tim Ryan's old district), perhaps Iowa. There are possibilities of capturing marginal tossup Democrat-held districts in Alaska, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Nevada. There are lesser chances, but still possible pickups, in Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Maine, Maryland, and a few others. Ideas of GOP seizures of numerous endangered Democrat seats in places like Illinois and New York are nothing but illusions and not even a single pickup will result (well, maybe 1 at most) absent a "red wave" of enormous proportions.

There are only 2 GOP-held seats which are in any real danger of being lost -- unless Democrat "ballot harvesting" fraud in California claims a whole bunch more, as it did in 2018 and very well might again in 2022 -- and those 2 are Mayra Flores in TX-34 and John Gibbs in MI-3. Both are in tough fights, and Gibbs in particular will go down to defeat as the GOP establishment abandoned him the moment he defeated Trump-hating weasel Peter Meijer in the primary. As always, the GOPe would greatly prefer a liberal Democrat to a MAGA conservative.

If we have to pick a specific final number in the House, we'll go with lucky +13. We'd be delighted to be wrong about some of this (particularly Kari Lake) but we prefer predictions based in reality rather than fantasy.

Tags:

U.S. House Senate 2022 Take back the House But not the Senate

Luna's victory in CD-13 is great, especially because the GOP simps hate her, and the school board election results in Florida (the good guys won some big ones!) are getting a lot of hype today, which is another noteworthy outcome. But as for the Republican congressional primaries in Florida, how are real conservatives supposed to be enthused by a bunch of squishes being nominated everywhere aside from CD-13?

Laura Loomer made it close but lost to ultra-squish Daniel Webster in CD-11, and Anthony Sabatini lost in CD-7 so the GOPe liberals are breathing huge sighs of relief about dodging those two conservative bullets. Lavern Spicer lost in CD-24, a district which no Republican could possibly win in November anyway so that's not a real big deal.

OTOH "moderate" incumbents across the board won in landslides mainly because, aside from Webster, they were facing no serious challengers: Carlos Gimenez, Maria Salazar, Mario Diaz-Balart, Michael Waltz, Vern Buchanan, some would add Gus Bilirakis to the RINO list.... none of them even had to break a sweat. They all had challengers, but none with sufficient funding or name recogntion to have any impact at all.

Conservatives are told that primary elections are the place to make themselves heard, because afterwards party unity is of paramount importance -- except when a conservative wins a primary, of course -- and we must hold our noses and vote for any liberal who happens to have a (R) after his name. More and more people are starting to realize that the fix is in as they notice how the establishment ensures that its candidates have massive financial advantages in the primaries, and how those same string-pullers often place phony conservatives on the ballot to split the vote of the party "base".

Tags:

U.S. House Florida 2022 Anna Paulina Luna Squishes win elsewhere

Photo credit: Tony Adamis/Special to the Times Union

Anyone assuming that Republicans are going to win most of the close ones in November is delusional. We have to turn out in numbers that make these races far less close.

Four years ago, in the highest-turnout midterm election in U.S. history, the GOP was annihilated and some presumed it was because Republicans weren't motivated (wrong) while the Rats were highly motivated by their hatred of Trump (bingo). R turnout was actually up substantially that year over where it had been in 2014; but D turnout was absolutely off the charts.

The days of Republicans being able to run the table in comparatively low-turnout midterms such as 1994, 2010 and 2014 are over. 2018 is the new midterm turnout model, and 2022's turnout in November (at least on the left) is going to be "2018 on steroids".

The GOP establishment, the ones who control the ad buys and the purse strings and who normally support only liberals and moderates while giving the shaft to conservatives, better get on the ball and run good, effective, hard-hitting ads anywhere the Democrat-controlled media will permit them to run -- and run them for ALL candidates, not just their RINO pets -- and try to get Republican enthusiasm to be as great as Democrat enthusiasm. It wasn't in 2018, it wasn't in 2020, and we're heading for a repeat in 2022.

If they don't get on the ball (and surely we can count on Ronna Romney, Mitch McConnell and the RNC/NRSC to do the right thing, LOL) then there are going to be a lot of so-called experts with dazed expressions on their faces on November 9th, looking around helplessly and wondering where "muh red wave" disappeared to.

Tags:

U.S. House New York Special election 2022 Bad candidate Narrow loss