.
With 2010 shapping up as a 1994 redux, things were already looking bleak for the leftists in the WA03. But these figures ought to cause even the most delusional diehard leftist to shudder.
In the 3rd District, here are the numbers on the 2 votes held last November. These votes were on Initiative 1033, the vote to reign in tax and spending by the morons running our state and local governments and R-71, the special rights for gays and the elderly Referendum that, while passing statewide, was soundly trounced in the 3rd.
Initiative 1033: Yes: 97,851 No 96,782 +1069
R 71 Yes: 92,835 No: 104413 +11,622
See, the problem for the fringe leftists the dems and faux-independents (who are and always have been leftist democrats) will run is that, when asked, they will HAVE to have opposed 1033 and they will have HAD to SUPPORT R71, one referendum rejected (and properly so) and one supported by the people they would now want to serve... positions anathema to the leftists who want to represent us.
Add that to the damage the leftist brand has suffered and will suffer on moronic issues like socialized medicine; the support of the massive, unneeded and unwanted waste of billions for a bridge we don't want and don't need, along with loot rail... and, well, this all spells impending doom for the leftists of the 3rd.
They all supported this garbage.... and now they own it.
.
2 comments:
You assume that the 2009 electorate will be the same as the 2010 electorate. Off-year elections have older and more conservative electorates. While a Democratic victory is far from guaranteed in the 3rd Cong. District, neither is a Republican victory. Especially when one considers the fact that Baird has easily won re-election over the past decade.
An interesting stat would be the 3rd District's voting for Murray (2004), and Cantwell (2000 especially since she was not an incumbent, 2006). I would argue those elections give a better indicator than votes on ballot measures in an off-year election.
Joel, thanks for stopping by.
If anything, the 2010 electorate will be even angrier than the current version.
As our taxes are increased; as the requirements for Obama/Democrat's health care reform kick in and we're required to pay for something we won't see for years, as unemployment worsens, as the value of the dollar continues to fall and we begin to feel the impacts of inflation, these numbers will become even more anti-democrat.
While you point to Murray and Cantwell and 2000, 04 and 06, I would argue that the closer model is that of 1994 in the off year.
Added to that mix will be our horrific economy and the lack of any of the promised impact of the stimulus package (You DO remember the promised 8% unemployment ceiling, don't you?) the continuing high unemployment rate on the democrat's watch and the anger of the electorate towards a House with, perhaps, the "tinnest" ears I have ever seen.
Although I disagree with Clinton's premise that the economy was bad in 92, his successful portrayal of the economy as BEING bad (even though it wasn't, say, in comparison to either Carter in the 82 election or Obama now) was the key to election victories for the GOP across the country, including in the 3rd.
In 94, we saw what voter anger did. And there is little indication that voter anger will subside between now and 2010 when the election takes place.
In 06 and 08, democrats were all about how damaged the GOP/Republican brand was. Now, the worm has turned, and it is the democrats who bear the responsibility for these actions.
There is no particular star running in the 3rd this time around so far. The democrats will have to disavow the legislative program that has buried us in debt for generations to come; for voting on bills that we haven't had a chance to review, Obama's promises notwithstanding, and the back room deals that Obama swore up and down he was going to put an end to.
No... this time around, the voters will have had enough. The local 09 initiative results were just the precursor of that.
Again, thanks for stopping by and sharing your views. Well writ, and appreciated, even if I disagree with them!
Post a Comment