Let’s Refute the ‘Cut & Run’ Stories
I’ve told friends that I’ve never fully bought into the notion that conservatives were going to stay home in droves. Now I’ve got documentation from RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman that validates my beliefs. Let’s start with the opening paragraph:
In recent days and weeks, the mainstream media have repeatedly claimed that the Republican base is suffering from “low voter enthusiasm.” It is easy to believe a story that is repeated so frequently, but in fact there is ample evidence to the contrary. By many measures, there are strong indications of a right-of-center base that is engaged and committed.
What’s not to be engaged about? Can conservatives afford to stay home when Democrats have shown with their votes that they’d attempt to foil passing the legislation that would codify into law the NSA intercept program? Can conservatives afford to stay home knowing that not voting for Republicans would mean Ted Kennedy and John McCain writing ‘immigration reform’? That’s a scary thought, isn’t it? Can we afford staying home knowing that a Chairman Rangel of the House Ways and Means Committee would start dismantling of the Bush tax cuts that’s strengthened the economy?
To quote from Gallup’s voter turnout projection, “Gallup’s latest analysis suggests Republicans and Democrats are now roughly even in terms of anticipated turnout in the midterm congressional elections. The voting intentions of the large pool of registered voters is now similar to the voting intentions of the smaller pool of likely voters, showing no disproportionate impact of turnout in either direction.”
It seems to me that wave elections can’t happen if both parties get their vote out. In fact, the fact that there’s near parity in likely voter turnout tells me that Democrats don’t stand much of a chance of even making substantial gains in either the House or Senate.
I’d further suggest that the data telling us that Republicans are very engaged refutes the ‘reporting’ that assumes all Christian conservatives will stay home because of the Foley fiasco.
There are ways besides polls to measure the intensity of the Republican base, and those also indicate that GOP voters are strongly engaged. Fundraising, for example, is often called the ‘first ballot’ for the simple reason that supporters only donate when they are involved and enthusiastic. That is why we are excited that the RNC received support from 362,000 new donors this cycle. We’ve averaged 8,256 contributions for each deposit day so far this year. We just announced that September has been our best financial month of the entire cycle. Our supporters know how important this election is, and their financial support shows it.
If we accept the fact that the ‘first ballot’ test is a way to gauge who’ll win, then isn’t it telling that the RNC is adding donors to its list while the DNC announced that it’ll borrow $5-10 million for the DSCC’s final push?
That’s an indicator that the DSCC knows that it won’t win back the Senate. If they’re borrowing money this close to the election they must see several races slipping away and that their only way of staying competitive is through massive ad buys funded with this loan. They’re right in assuming that. Harold Ford’s candidacy nosedived with his ‘in-your-face’ stunt Friday; Claire McCaskill’s candidacy never got traction because of her ’scandal-a-day’ troubles and appeal for Jon Tester’s ultraliberalism is fading faster than a setting sun in a Big Sky sunset. Other than that, the DSCC is in great shape.
Technorati Tags: Election 2006, Larry Sabato, Harold Ford, Claire McCaskill, Scandal, DSCC, Santorum, Casey, Illegal Immigration
Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog
October 22nd, 2006 at 9:49 am
The Democrats are the party of group politics and groupthink. That’s why the media push the idea that Foley tarnishes all Republicans. Conservatives know better; Foley tarnishes only himself.
October 22nd, 2006 at 1:30 pm
“…low voter enthusiasm…”
What does that have to do with anything, other than donkey wet dreams?
Sure, I’ve got incredibly “low voter enthusiasm”, but that doesn’t mean I’m staying home on the 7th. I will vote, even vote holding my nose, but senate, house and local races aren’t the only things on the ballot. Here in Oregon there is a measure to limit abortions to 15-17 year-olds without parental notification. Why would I stay home from that one? Or term limits. Or on, and on.
I will vote my conscience on the measures. In most cases I will hold my nose and vote against donkeys for the rest of the races. But I will vote, even if I do have “low voter enthusiasm.” The thought of Nancy Pelosi being Speaker (third in line), or Rangel pulling the monetary strings is just too scary to think about, let alone maybe as many as two more SCOTUS nominations being up for grabs.