Recently in Big Tent Category

You may have noticed our 2010 Senate and House election projections on the lefthand sidebar over the past six months.  Given that the backswing of Da Pendulum was visible fully fifteen months ago, or not even five months into the Age of Hopenchange, it seemed the natural thing to do.  I [ahem] inaugurated the (homemade) sidebar widgets the day of the ObamaCare ramdown.  Starting with the traditional Labor Day fall campaign kickoff, I will be posting daily updates detailing the, um, details that underlie the scoreboard numbers when there's any change to report.

Now to methodology.

With the Senate scoreboard, I average for each race the polling of the most recent available seven day period.  That makes the numbers as near to "real-time" as possible.  A handicap of that would be that until the campaign's final days, there won't typically be enough polling of any particular race to provide a broad sample for averaging.  That isn't a problem for me, though, because I don't use or cite or even pay attention to Obamedia polling since I simply do not trust the source.  I want REAL numbers, not leftwingnut propaganda.

Rasmussen is my polling anchor.  Because he generates numbers I like?  No.  Because he uses a likely voter screen that produces the most accurate numbers in the polling business?  Yes.  Remember, Rasmussen called Obama's seven point victory margin over John McCain two years ago on the button, just as he did George W. Bush's three point win over John Kerry in '04.  State level races are inevitably a little more hit & miss, but Scott Rasmussen's methodology is the best there is.

I also include independent pollsters Mason-Dixon and Survey USA in the mix.  To date there hasn't been enough overlap for weighting to be practical.  If it does, I'll probably go 50-25-25, particularly in light of SurveyUSA's trend of late of producing GOP-skewed results that I don't want to get roped into liking too much.

For the House scoreboard I do NOT track every single race.  Yes, I'm a politics junkie, but I DO (blessedly) work for a living, and I DO need to sleep.  Plus not even RealClearPolitics is that ambitious, much less an evenings & weekends blogwarrior hack like myself.

Rather, I whipped up a spreadsheet back in March that lines up all 435 congressional districts and the margins of victory each Democrat enjoyed in 2008 (since Da Pendulum is swinging the GOP's way, I didn't need to bother with the margins of survival of their remnant).  I then took the aggregate Donk victory margin in all House races and computed the difference from the current Rasmussen generic congressional ballot poll, and deducted that difference from individual Democrat 2008 victory margins to see how many seats in the aggregate were likely to flip from "blue" to "red".  I also made allowances for Republican seats, like those of Senate candidates Mark Kirk of Illinois and Mike Castle of Delaware, that were being vacated and likely to be Donk pickups, and ones that were one-time and likely unrepeatable flukes (Charles Djou of Hawaii, Joseph Cao of Louisiana) - though if the Big Red Wave is big enough, they might yet survive.

The first results indicated a sixty-two seat Republican pickup.  The largest gain to date (equalled this week) has been sixty-seven, and the lowest I've seen since March has been fifty-three.  So suffice it to say, a GOP House next year isn't a question of if, but by how much.

Since I don't track individual House races, there's no such detail to report in daily posts, and they'll focus on the Senate races.

Now that the disclosures have been made and the foundation laid, let's get busy.

SAFE REPUBLICAN (GOP +10 or more)

ALABAMA: SHELBY 59%, Barnes 32% (hold)

ARIZONA: McCAIN 55%, Glassman 34 (hold)

ARKANSAS; Boozman 65%, LINCOLN 27% (pickup)

DELAWARE: Castle 49%, Coons 37% (pickup)

FLORIDA: Rubio 40%, Crist 30%, Meek 21% (hold)

GEORGIA: ISAKSON 57%, Thurmond 30% (hold)

IDAHO: CRAPO 63%, Sullivan 24% (hold)

INDIANA: Coats 50%, Ellsworth 29% (pickup)

IOWA: GRASSLEY 55%, Conlin 35% (hold)

KANSAS: Moran 61%, Johnston 28% (hold)

KENTUCKY: Paul 55%, Conway 40% (hold)

LOUISIANA: VITTER 54%, Meloncon 33% (hold)

MISSOURI: Blunt 54%, Carnahan 41% (hold)

NEW HAMPSHIRE: Ayotte 51%, Hodes 38% (hold)

NORTH DAKOTA: Hoeven 69%, Potter 22% (pickup)

OKLAHOMA: COBURN 67%, Rogers 24% (hold)

SOUTH CAROLINA: DeMINT 63%, Greene 19% (hold)

UTAH: Lee 58%, Granato 28% (hold)

LIKELY REPUBLICAN (GOP +5-10)

ALASKA: Miller 50%, McAdams 44% (hold)

NORTH CAROLINA: BURR 49%, Marshall 40% (hold)

OHIO: Portman 47%, Fisher 41% (hold)

PENNSYLVANIA: Toomey 48%, Sestak 42% (pickup)

LEANS REPUBLICAN (GOP +0-5)

COLORADO: Buck 49%, BENNET 45% (pickup)

WASHINGTON: Rossi 50%, MURRAY 47% (pickup)

WISCONSIN: Johnson 47%, FEINGOLD 46% (pickup)

LEANS DEMOCRAT (Donks +0-5)

CALIFORNIA: BOXER 47.5%, Fiorina 46% (hold)

ILLINOIS: Giannoulias 45%, Kirk 45% (hold - "tie goes to the champion" or "I don't do 'tossups'")

NEVADA: REID 47.5%, Angle 45.5% (hold)

LIKELY DEMOCRAT (Donks +5-9)

CONNECTICUT: Blumenthal 47%, McMahon 40% (hold)

WEST VIRGINIA: Manchin 48%, Raese 42% (hold)

SAFE DEMOCRAT (Donks +10 or more)

HAWAII: INOUYE (hold)

MARYLAND: MIKULSKI 58%, Wargotz 33% (hold)

NEW YORK: GILLIBRAND 50%, DeGuardi 33% (hold)

                     SCHUMER 63%, Townsend 26% (hold)

OREGON: WYDEN 56%, Huffman 36% (hold)

My "leaners" generally translate to everybody else's "tossups," and happen to split 50-50, which hasn't been the way close races have shaken out in recent cycles, much to our bitter chagrin.  If that trend continues in this go-'round (and really, it's almost owed to us), an eight-seat GOP gain falling two seats short of the majority would become an eleven-seat table run that would absolutely ruin Al Franken's next four years, assuming he bothered sticking around that long once the more-fun-than-a-barrel-of-Colemans majority gig became a, well, "job".

Between that and looking forward to the scowling, growling Chucky Schumer as Minority Leader, his smug SOB mode tucked away indefinitely, I don't know how I'd contain myself on Election Night.

But I hope I get to find out.

And one of them is really big:

Wow, Castle is a funny-looking SOB.  He resembles how Berke Breathed used to draw old people in Bloom County.  If his first name was Jake, you know what nickname I'd come up with for the two of them.

Unfortunately I don't know how much of his 52.49 ACU rating comes from fiscal policy votes, so I'm unable to access how accurate Governor Christie's putting over of Castle as a "small government" guy actually is.  I do know that most 52.49 ACU guys don't generally fit that description.  On the other hand, Congressman Castle did vote against Hogzilla I in the House last year.  Whether he'd have done so in the Senate when then-RINO Snarlin' Arlen Specter, along with the Maine Wonder Twins didn't is, of course, a whole other question.

But as I sighingly said yesterday, fair-to-middlin' on the ideological scale is the tippy-top apex for conservatives in a top-ten lib bastion such as Delaware.

I'd make a nose-holding crack, except that "true conservative" Christine O'Donnell keeps trying to grab my contextual attention:

Not that I can't sympathize, but, honestly, being followed around by opposition researchers with camcorders and camera phones and the like is part of the game anymore, certainly ever since ex-Senator George Allen's "macaca moment" and the Washington Post's insatiable hyping of it destroyed his re-election bid in 2006.  Every campaign is looking for that golden gaffe.  You just have to be cognizant of it and watch what you say.  Suffocating scrutiny is part of running for political office - especially for conservative campaigns.  Parts of it suck, but that's the way it is.  If you don't want to put up with it, don't run.

Thing is, after her surrogates attempted to rumormonger Mike Castle into a queer affair, it's kinda difficult to sympathize TOO much.  You KNOW she'd be doing the same thing to Castle, if she had the resources to shadow him.  But as Jazz Shaw opined this week:

The congressman has been vetted by the opposition from hell to breakfast, and if there’s any dirt to be found on him, it will likely require a significant meteor impact to unearth it. 

Which is why O'Donnell's dime-store dirt-diggers aren't bothering with shovels and are skipping right to MSU mode.

And that brings us back to the same place: Mike Castle ain't conservatives' cup 'o tea, [heh] but even if Christine O'Donnell was a credit to her professed philosphical pedigree, she suffers from one fatal flaw: She can't win.  And "Mr. Limekiller" can.

Let us count the ways of why that matters.  Gabe Malor:

I'm genuinely puzzled at folks who say they'd rather the seat be Democrat than in the hands of a RINO. Given the number of Senate seats now in play, this is tantamount to declaring that they'd rather have a Democratic Senate than a Republican one.

I'm saying, it might be different if Republicans were going to have control of the Senate anyway. Then, heh, no real harm to letting our "problem Senators" know what we expect in the future. Same thing on the flipside. If the Democrats were going to have insurmountable control of the Senate...again, it doesn't matter so much whether the Democrat or the RINO wins.

But we're talking about taking control of the Senate, something that only now is turning into a real possibility. And that's going to take putting up with folks like Collins and Snowe and Castle. As infuriating as they are, I'd rather put up with them than watch the Democrats run the country into the ground under another two years of Majority Leader Reid (or his successor)....

Why do we want a Republican Senate? Aside from totally crushing the Democrats' spirit, control of the Senate means that our guys will be the chairmen for each committee and subcommittee. This means that they will have control of the calendar. It means that if Obama wants something, he'll have to negotiate with Republicans, rather than his own sycophantic party members. 

More from Eeyore:

The flaw in this reasoning, of course, is that some things are bound to go right for Democrats despite their dumbest efforts to prevent that from happening....You’re simply not going to get a map that’s completely red, any more than the idiot liberals who were high on Hopenchange two years ago were ever going to get a map that’s completely blue.

J-Ger vis-a-vie CD's "oddness":

I hear a few “who cares?” responses. Fine, you don’t care. But I do, and I suspect more than a few Delaware voters will care, too. In the end, the primary election will turn on what Delaware Republicans care about.

This isn’t even getting into her former employees beginning a project whose first act is to accuse Mike Castle of being gay; this is what caused Erick Erickson of RedState to head for the exits. Is Erick a bad conservative, too? Do true conservatives shrug their shoulders and avert their eyes when a candidate’s associates pull stunts like this?

The Ultimate Tighty-Righty actually chips in sensible suggestion for a change:

Politicians as experienced as Castle know the importance of honoring their word to other political actors. (Sort of like "honor among thieves," except that most politicians really are NOT thieves.) Conservative leaders can go to him, perfectly legally, and say, look, you saw what happened to Lisa Murkowski in Alaska and to Bob Bennett in Utah. You see the polls that have you just five points up on O'Donnell. You know you are at least at some risk of failing to win the nomination. But we can call off the dogs of war. We can stop ginning up the organizational fervor that could propel O'Donnell to victory. What we ask from you is that you keep your door open to us once you are in the Senate; that you sign at least a two-year version of Grover Norquist's anti-tax pledge; that you agree in writing that you will not switch parties if elected and that you would resign rather than do so..... that sort of thing. The pledges don't even need to be public. They can't mention any specific legislation, and they can't be couched in terms of a quid pro quo. But they still can be binding on an honorable man, and Castle is an honorable man.

Hey, if Castle-man has the Quinn F'ing Hillyer super-duper seal of approval PLUS Double-C's right-wing rock star gold-standard endorsement, are we REALLY going to do any better than this?  Geraghty throws down the bottom line:

A guy who checks all the boxes and holds all the right positions but who can’t win is good for some debate entertainment and not much else. That kind of a candidate is Alan Keyes. That kind of a candidate lets the other side not even have to sweat winning the election. It’s odd; the people who talk the most about how they want to stand for principle, and how they oppose conceding any ideological positions find themselves conceding many winnable House and Senate seats.

If you want to influence policy, you need the votes in the legislature to do it. If you want that, 99 times out of 100 you’re going to need a coalition, and that means having some folks who aren’t with you 100% of the time on every issue. If we get big Republican majorities in the House and Senate, we’ll find ways to get conservative ideas enacted into law. If we have big Democratic majorities in the House and Senate, our ideas are effectively dead.

Or, to quote Otto Von Bismarck, "Politics is....the art of the possible".

Parting thought to O'Donnellites: Mike Castle is seventy-one years old.  I would suspect that serving a term in the U.S. Senate would be his career swansong.  He won't be there for decades.  The seat'll probably be open again in 2016.  Try to find a credible "true conservative" (William Roth was from Delaware, after all, unless he's been posthumously excommunicated) and maybe your herculean efforts for The Cause won't be so risibly wasted.

For years I've seemingly vaccilated between realism and principle when it comes to what we refer to as RINOs (Republicans In Name Only).  Go here for an outstanding sample of the latter; I don't have any particular example of the former, because, in the big-picture sense, realism has been my default mode.

But even in that "memo of understanding" el foldo five years ago, for all that I ragingly blasted RINOs and consigned them to the fiery pits of political hell, there is one factor that needs to be pointed out.  Of the seven "moderate" Republican senators who defected to the then-minority Democrats on breaking their extraconstitutional filibusters of President Bush's constitutionalist appellate court nominees - McCain, DeWine, Snowe, Warner, Grahamnesty, Collins, and Chaffee - four of those seven are/were from "red" states.  Only three of them were from the deep "blue".

That matters, because the most readily available means of conservative retribution for such backstabbing perfidy - the primary challenge - is really only viable in "red" states where the "true conservative" alternative has an even or better chance of winning the general election that follows.

A lot of buzz has surrounded the fall of less than stallwart 'Pubies such as Robert Bennett of Utah (felled by Mike Lee) and more recently Lisa Murkowski of Alaska (toppled by Joe Miller).  The Tea Party on a "Shermanesque" march through the Republican Party, as the crocodile-concerned-about-the-GOP Obamedia spins it.  But the latter should be afraid, because Lee and Miller are going to be in the U.S. Senate next year.  Their unseating of those two RINO incumbents strengthened the party in states where doing so did not significantly endanger those seats with falling into Donk hands.

Even in more "swing" or "purple" states like Nevada (where TPer Sharron Angle upset establishmentarian Sue Lowden) and Colorado (where TPer Ken Buck bested establishmentarian Jane Norton), both winners are competitive (Buck leading appointed incumbent Michael Bennett, Angle in a dead head with Dirty Harry Reid), and in a GOP tsunami cycle, are better than even bets to flip those seats back from the Dark Side.

But then there are states like....Maine.  Massachusetts.  Connecticut.  "Blue" states.  States so blue that the flag there has blue stripes instead of red.  So blue that when the sun sets, it turns from yellow to blue instead of red.  So blue that the inhabitants are all Andorians because nobody who lives there has red blood.  So blue that the visible light spectrum doesn't HAVE a red wavelength when it passes through their airspace.

States where "true conservatives" have very little chance of winning, but RINOs can be competitive.

The Maine Wonder Twins (the aforementioned Senators Collins and Snowe) both voted for Hogzilla.  Snowe flirted with supporting ObamaCare.  The both voted for ObamaFinReg.  They're RINOs.  They do things like that.  It is infuriatingly frustrating at times.  But you know what?  They're from a really, really, REALLY "blue" state where our choice is between somebody who'll be with us half the time versus somebody who'll never be with us EVER.  So in their case you take the half-loaf, because you're never going to get the full meal deal.

Same thing with Scott Brown, the man who returned the Kennedy Seat to the people.  TPers worked like mad to push him over the top and were ecstatic when he triumphed over Martha Coakly.  That euphoria lasted about a month when Brown sold out on Son of Hogzilla.  But as I advised Jenber, this was going to happen.  It was inevitable.  Scottie B. ran against ObamaCare; he did NOT run as a "true conservative".  Why?  Because he never would have gotten elected in the first place.  Half a loaf versus none.

I'd love for it to be otherwise, but reality is reality.  Rush Limbaugh is correct when he says that conservatism wins national elections.  But that doesn't mean that conservatism wins EVERYWHERE IN THE COUNTRY.  In hostile states, the Right has to take what it can get.

Which brings us to Delaware, and a suddenly "bitter" Republican primary war that I honestly didn't know existed until today between coasting-to-general-election-victory RINO and current Delaware Congressman Mike "Half A Loaf" Castle and "true conservative" but more than a little crankish Christine O'Donnell.

This is the third time in as many cycles that O'Donnell has run for the Senate from Delaware.  She was an afterthought in the GOP primary in '06, and won the nod in '08 only because nobody else bothered in a Donk wave cycle.  Slow Joe retained the seat he subsequently vacated by thirty points, and outspent the pauperized O'Donnell by a FACTOR of thirty.  Now she's running again, evidently because being a professional candidate is the occupation as which she's been the least unsuccessful (follow the link above, I'm not exaggerating).

Yes, Mike Castle is a RINO.  Yes, he voted for cripple and tax in the House last summer.  But he's been elected statewide in Delaware eleven times - twice as governor, nine times as the state's at-large congressional representative.  The predominantly "blue" Delaware electorate knows Mike Castle and, for weal and for woe, likes him.  Whereas to the degree that they know Christine O'Donnell, they just don't take her seriously.

Things like this, however, stand to build up active dislike:

This local radio interview did not go well for Christine O’Donnell, who is challenging Representative Mike Castle for the GOP Senate nomination in Delaware.

The host plays audio of O’Donnell bragging that she won two of Delaware’s three counties in her 2008 Senate bid against Joe Biden.

In Sussex County, she came quite close, 43,123 votes to Joe Biden’s 43,395 votes.

She admits that she considers that a tie, 49% to 49%. While losing by 272 votes isn’t technically a tie, it is a small margin of defeat, so fine. Let’s say she covered the point spread.

But her other “win” is Kent County, where she lost, 27,981 to 37,074. That amounts to 43% to 56.9%. It’s really hard to argue that that even meets the broadest definition of “a tie.”

Of course, she lost the largest county, New Castle, 69,491 votes to 177,070 votes, roughly 28.1% to 71.8%.

In other words, if she had carried every vote cast in the Senate race in Sussex County in 2008, she still would have lost by more than 18,000 votes.

Then she chooses to repeat to the host that many people charge he’s on the take by Mike Castle. It goes downhill from there.

And this:

Sounds like some sort of public access channel programming.  O'Donnell disavowed this smear against Castle, and maybe public access channel-calibre outfits are all she can afford, but I have to say, the most descriptive adjective that comes to my mind when I look at Christine O'Donnell's career, background, quasi-paranoia and tactics is...."loser".  And to those amongst the Good Guys like Mark Levin and the guys at RedState.com, who not unreasonably or un-understandingly loathe Mike Castle's RINO guts, I have to ask the question: Is this a person who seems to you like one who is LIVING the "true conservative" values she purportedly espouses?  And someone that we want as a standardbearer for "true conservatism"?

Ace and Eeyore make the same realist argument.  Here's Ace's punchline:

The pathway to success is to change Blue to [Purple], and Purple to Red, and Red to Even Redder. We are doing that. We are trading in RINO Murkowski for a Senator more in sync with a true red state…

We cannot get a super-red person elected to a blue state. Period. The anti-Obama factor gives everyone about an 8% bump. Add that to Christine O’Donnell’s 35% (from last time) and she gets to 43%.

The Tea Party Express needs to ask itself a trio of hard questions:

1) Why did Sarah Palin endorse Carly Fiorina instead of "true conservative" Chuck DeVore to challenge Barbara Boxer in bluest California?

2) Isn't the cause of "true conservatism" advanced more by taking back the Senate majority with a RINO like Mike Castle when chairman's gavels will fall into the hands of GOP colleagues much closer to "pure" than he is?

3) Is Christine O'Donnell really serving the "true conservative" cause by playing general election spoiler the only beneficiaries of which can be Barack Obama and the Democrat Party?

Well, THAT was fast.

After the Joe Miller campaign continued ignoring my advice by expanding its accusations of voter fraud to include the State of Alaska itself, and it looked like there finally would be the Republican "civil war" that the Obamedia is always proclaiming is at hand....sanity dramatically descended:

National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn (Texas) spoke with Joe Miller over the weekend and assured him that the NRSC will stay neutral in the Alaska GOP Senate primary and support whoever wins, according to Republican sources.

...

NRSC chief counsel Sean Cairncross was on the ground in Alaska for three days last week, but has since returned to Washington, D.C. He traveled at Murkowski’s request, and offered her campaign team general advice. But sources say the NRSC is not coordinating with her. It also isn’t participating in the vote count or in any future recounts.

...

In fact, one reason Cairncross returned to Washington so quickly was to ensure that the NRSC’s actions would not be misinterpreted.

As I, um, argued from the start.  Even if you cast ethics and principles aside for pure, undiluted pragmatism, the fact remained that there simply wasn't anything in it for the NRSC to try to drag Murkowski over the top.  Alaska is an R+18 state; whoever wins the GOP senatorial primary is going to win in November, period.  Miller admittedly wouldn't win by the same crushing margin the Murk would, but double-digits is double-digits nonetheless.  Hence, there was everything for John Cornyn to lose and nothing to gain.  'Tis gratifying to see see logic prevail for a change.

But it didn't stop there:

On Sunday morning, over coffee and donuts, the ExComm voted unanimously, 5 to 0 to deny the Senator the ballot line. There was no malice intended. ALP Chair Kohlhaas has repeatedly stated that she is a nice lady, and the ALP was flattered by the offer.

The meeting was contentious at first. Two board members who were clearly on the Tea Party friendly Joe Miller side were combative before they realized that the other three board members agreed with them on the essentials. At a number of points the meeting even digressed into name-calling. The ‘F’ bomb was even tossed around a number of times. One board member was hellbent on holding an immediate statewide meeting open to full membership or registered Libertarians to decide the matter. That idea was shot down 4 to 1.

The vote on Murkowski was taken at about halfway through the meeting which lasted a total of three hours. After the result was clear, tempers calmed down, and the five member board moved forward with plans on how to announce the results to the media.

This is a triumph of principle AND self-respect, particularly since the Libertarians had quite a bit to gain by dumping their joke of a senatorial nominee and putting the slot up to the highest bidder.  It's why they'll never win any elections, but you gotta admire their purity.

So that leaves the Murk with no viable option other than hoping that there were enough early votes for her before Miller's late surge to make up her deficit.  Which, due to Miller's imprudent rhetoric, pretty much guarantees that if Murkowski does eventually take the lead from the absentees, Miller'll sue, and if she falls short, so will she.

Lovely.

Does that give Scott McAdams a rarer than hens-lips-other-than-two-years-ago shot at sticking The Last Frontier with two Donk senators?  With all do respect to Eeyore.....no.  But it will make it robustly non-dull.

BTW, Miller's tampering accusation against the State of Alaska has been....refuted.  So how's about you and Murk stop treating each other as enemies and refocus on the big picture of saving the country?  Sound like a plan?

While hundreds of Americans are campaigning nationwide to defeat the Democratic Congress and fill the 435 seats in the House of Representatives, I'm the ONLY candidate who is actually running AGAINST Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, here in California's 8th Congressional District. I'm the ONLY candidate who can truly RETIRE NANCY PELOSI this Fall and stop her continuous assault on the American taxpayer.

In 2006, Nancy Pelosi led the Democratic charge by claiming she would "drain the swamp," but after 23 years in Washington and the last 4 years as House Speaker, she neglected to look for the drain. In fact, she continues to turn a blind eye and SUPPORTS her colleagues' indiscretions, most notably:

• Charlie Rangel,
• Maxine Waters,
• Barney Frank, and
• Eric Massa.

Now she travels the country, celebrating the 75th Anniversary of the Social Security fund while ignoring the downward death spiral she is leaving for future generations of Americans with her passage of Obamacare, stimulus funds, cash for clunkers and other wasteful government spending programs.

Please SELECT HERE AND contribute generously to defeat Nancy Pelosi and the radical Obama Agenda. This is America's first real chance to rid us of her terrible reign.

Your generous contribution of $25, $50, $100, $250, the federal maximum amount of $2,400, or any amount you can afford to give is sincerely appreciated and will be used wisely towards the defeat of Nancy Pelosi.

When the Democrats won on November 7, 2006, Pelosi told us that "the American people voted to restore integrity and honesty in Washington, D.C., and the Democrats intend to lead the most honest, most open and most ethical Congress in history."

Instead, we have witnessed the least ethical and least transparent Congress in our history. Under the rule of Nancy Pelosi, we have lost more civil rights, are forced to pay more taxes, saw wasteful government spending increase exponentially, which just last week included another $26 billion in a so-called "state-aid bill."

The surest and quickest way to defeat the radical Obama agenda is to defeat Nancy Pelosi, the cheerleader-in-chief, the head financier and the architect of the most imperial Congress in this nation's history...and that's why I need your help TODAY!

It's not fundraising rhetoric when I tell you that with your contribution I can save America by keeping Nancy Pelosi from continuing to implement Barack Obama's radical socialist agenda--it's a REALITY. If you ever wanted to ensure Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic Congress didn't make it back to Washington in 2011, then this is your chance to get involved and make a true difference in the outcome of the MOST IMPORTANT RACE IN THE 2010 ELECTION.

Will you please contribute to my campaign TODAY and help me restore YOUR freedoms by retiring Nancy Pelosi? Your generous contribution of $25, $50, $100, $250, the federal maximum amount of $2,400, or any amount you can afford to give is sincerely appreciated.

It is Nancy Pelosi who has single-handedly rammed the health care bill through Congress that's now causing insurance rates to skyrocket, taxes to rise, and accelerating an exodus of good doctors from communities who needed them most. It is now Nancy Pelosi that is pushing a cap-and-tax bill that will kill jobs nationwide, raise the cost of energy, make us more dependent on fossil fuels, and further damage our already anemic economy.

It is Pelosi who continues to spearhead the drive to saddle this nation with $13 trillion in new debt over the next decade. It is Speaker Pelosi who now dares to tell us that we're still not paying enough in taxes and that we must pay EVEN MORE!

Pelosi, just like the President, wants to control EVERY aspect of your life. She is personally responsible for championing some of the most egregious legislation that will increase your taxes and strip you of your personal liberties.

Rather than worrying about defending Americans from foreign threats, focusing on the need to improve homeland security, getting the government off our backs, so that we can get back to work and stimulating the economy, Pelosi seeks ways to create media opportunities while stealing your freedoms and spending $19,000 of your hard-earned tax dollars on her office rent. She masks it all under the guise of "creating" and "saving" jobs.

So, can I count on you to make a generous contribution TODAY and help DETHRONE Nancy Pelosi before she has the chance to completely destroy our country?

I also believe that the election of 2010 will determine the destiny of the United States. Speaker Pelosi and her Washington cronies are taking this nation down a path that will destroy the greatest country the world has known. Defeating Speaker Pelosi will stop the Obama agenda in its tracks NOW!

I am working day and night to make sure it happens.

Your generous contribution TODAY is needed to truly help DETHRONE Nancy Pelosi before she has the chance to completely destroy our country. Select HERE now and help me give Nancy Pelosi the fight of her life.

My campaign is breaking new ground daily — I have already received endorsements that reflect the uniting force of liberty. In just the last few months alone, the Republican Liberty Caucus endorsed me and I have received the endorsements of Barry Goldwater Jr., Dr. Ron Paul and dozens of other California and national leaders and organizations.

I believe that the nation is on a disastrous course as a result of Pelosi's reign, and I am fully committed to restoring fiscal discipline in Washington and fighting to keep more in the pockets of taxpayers so that we can get the unemployed jobs that pay a decent wage. My daughter and your children deserve to live in a nation where the American dream is a reality, not something that's taught in the history books.

My wife, family and friends nationwide are supporting my campaign with great enthusiasm but we can't do it alone. As someone who has benefited from the American Dream, I believe it is incumbent upon me to ensure my children and yours can benefit from the same opportunities without fear that our government shall continue to strip away the freedoms that make this nation great.

Like you, I share the determination to "FIRE PELOSI," THE MOST DANGEROUS POLITICIAN IN AMERICA. She helped the Democratic Party gain control of the U.S. Congress in 2006 and is poised to push our country closer to the statist agenda she and Barrack Obama have in store for our country.

Yours in liberty,

John Dennis
Republican for U.S. Congress

Why is Chris Christie above fifty percent voter approval after eight months of courageously and unapologetically laying the fiscal conservative smack down in a heretofore hopelessly corrupt "blue" rathole like New Jersey?  In a word, leadership.  Treating the people of the Garden State like adults instead of children.  And "bullying," if you will, the people who have been treating them like children.  It's earned the Jersey Guv more than just approval - it's earned him respect.

Let's recycle the post title again: This is what leadership looks like.  Especially when one of the screw-ups is your own:

Subsequent to this presser, Double-C learned that his education commissioner, one-time Jersey conservative rising star Brent Schundler, had not, after all, verbally supplied the Feducrats with the correct numbers on that one sheet of paper as Schundler had assured the Governor he had.  Rock-and-a-hard-place spot for him, isn't it?  Does he circle the wagons?  Make excuses?  Whine at the regime for its gotcha-ism?

Nope:

Governor Chris Christie, reacting swiftly to a brewing crisis over a failed federal grant application, has fired Department of Education Commissioner Bret Schundler.

Schundler was let go by Christie this morning following the release of a video by the federal Department of Education that contradicted Schundler’s assertion that he provided federal Race to the Top grant application reviewers with correct state aid numbers after an error in the documents was revealed.

“I was extremely disappointed to learn that the videotape of the Race to the Top presentation was not consistent with the information provided to me by the New Jersey Department of Education and which I then conveyed to the people of New Jersey. As a result, I ordered an end to Bret Schundler’s service as New Jersey’s Education Commissioner and as a member of my administration,” Christie said in a statement issued at 12:30 p.m. today.

There was nothing else Governor Christie could do if honesty, integrity, and accountability were to be upheld.  Make no mistake, this fiasco isn't a brick in Double-C's road to glory.  But even in a setback, he is displaying the same level, quality, and intensity of leadership that he has brought to Trenton ever since he took office.  And the people of New Jersey will respect that as well.

Remember November Act I: 'A New Jersey' Opening Featurette from Republican Governors Association on Vimeo.

10 Weeks - 'A New Jersey' Teaser 2 from Republican Governors Association on Vimeo.