Will these midterms be 2010 v2.0?

In August of 2009, people attended congressional townhalls to speak out against the Affordable Care Act, aka the ACA, aka Obamacare. These were passionate people who didn't hesitate in telling their elected officials what they thought of the ACA. Most of those people were passionate because they thought it was a terrible bill.

The Democrats' plan was to use their August recess to sell the nation on the positives of Obamacare. Within half a month, it was obvious to the Democrats' leadership that their strategy had failed. Suddenly, Democrat politician sightings were as rare as hail storms at the North Pole.

It was obvious that Democrats were heading for a terrible defeat in the 2010 midterm elections. Nobody at that time thought that Nancy Pelosi would keep her speaker's gavel. Predictions of Democrats losing 40 seats net were commonplace. LFR predicted a loss of 60-65 net seats for the Democrats. They lost 63 net seats.

This midterm is shaping up to become another blowout of Democrats, though it isn't likely that Democrats will lose 60 seats net. In 2010, the animating issue was the ACA. The Democrats' steadfastness insistence on passing the ACA contributed to the uprising. This time around, the animating factors will be Critical Race Theory, Biden's open borders and crime.

I don't know who this woman is but I'm certain that she speaks for millions of parents nationwide:

I love it when the board member admonishes her for using another person's name. This woman then replies "I have proof. Are you afraid of the proof?" When the board woman said she didn't have a problem having a peaceful conversation with the citizen but that this wasn't a peaceful conversation, the citizen replied "No. That's your opinion. There you go again. This is peaceful. I'm not burning, looting or murdering."

The greater likelihood is that this midterm will be like 1994, when Republicans 'only' won 52 net seats in the House. Still, that will put them in a positive position going into the presidential election cycle. Democrats, in addition to defending Joe Biden's agenda that they voted for, will need to explain why they haven't shot down more of Biden's leftist agenda. Good luck with that.

Add to that the fact that Democrats' mixed messaging on crime, police reform and the economy. The ascendant part of the Party wants open borders and to defund the police. The rest of the Democrats are either traditional law-and-order Democrats or they're too afraid to stand up to the Squad.

The public isn't confused. They don't just want promises of normalcy. They want a restoration of normalcy. Republicans aren't confused, either. They're the party of pro-growth economic policies, closing the border, finishing the wall and restoring President Trump's immigration policies. Republicans are also bigtime supporters of the law-and-order movement.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tim Walz's Confederate Flag Fiasco

Image
After Minnesota's Democrats shoved the most controversial progressive legislation down Minnesotans' throats, gossip started popping up about Gov. Walz being interested in running for president . That's died off but Gov. Walz is still making headlines, this time for all the wrong reasons. First, Gov. Walz isn't the brightest bulb in the chandelier. Still, Gov. Walz is fighting against Minnesota's history. This Alpha News article quotes David Hann, the chairman of Minnesota's Republican Party, as saying " The flag the DFL has eliminated was a version of the historic flag our regiments fought under during the Civil War. Minnesota was the first state to offer troops to the Union cause in 1861 , beginning a long tradition of leading the nation in confronting injustice. The DFL quest to erase our history is repugnant and should be rejected." Gov. Walz, though, sees things differently. He's quoted as saying "Minnesota is a diverse state, it continue
Read more

What is Kamala Harris afraid of?

Image
Apparently, Kamala Harris suddenly loves debating. Let me rephrase that. Harris loves debating as long as the moderators are partisan hacks. She wants nothing to do with a debate moderated by Fox's Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum. She's afraid of Bret and Martha because a) they'll either fact-check both her and Trump or they won't fact-check either of them and b) Bret and Martha aren't afraid of asking follow-up questions. To a candidate whose answers are scripted and who isn't quick on her feet, the last thing you want is a follow-up question. Kamala fears follow-up questions like vampires hate wooden stakes, sunlight and holy water. Why has Kamala Harris avoided Fox News like the plague? The moderators/propagandists fact-checked Donald Trump aggressively but didn't fact-check Harris . Why didn't David Muir and Linsey Davis fact-check both candidates equally? Is it because Harris doesn't like fair fights? Perhaps she's just afraid of getting exp
Read more

Why is Joe Biden letting Hamas off the hook?

Image
It isn't disputable whether Joe Biden's administration is letting Hamas off the hook. That issue was settled months ago, when a spineless Joe Biden caved to activists interested in saving Hamas and thwarting the Israelis' attempt to defend themselves. Gerard Baker's op-ed highlights what's at stake for the U.S. if the terrorists are permitted to survive. In his op-ed, Baker wrote "If, under the pressure of internal Democratic politics and global public opinion, the Biden administration forces a 'cease-fire' that leaves our closest ally in the region short of victory over an enemy that seeks to destroy it, sooner or later we shall all pay the price." It's time to revisit George W. Bush's speech to a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, 2001. It's required that we remind ourselves of one of its most important paragraphs. In talking about who committed the atrocities of 9/11, President Bush identified al-Qa'ida as "a collectio
Read more