The CA 12th (formerly the 8th district) – Nancy Pelosi faces John Dennis in November election – Dennis new Commercial Quirky a Bit of Humor goes a long way.

The Contest: John Dennis Vs. Nancy Pelosi for the 12th - image John Dennis 2012 dot com

Yes, Virginia, there is a challenger to Nancy Pelosi in the California 8th district, one Libertarian, John Dennis. Dennis ran against Nancy Pelosi in 2010, the results of which race, was one of the few that the NYTimes predicted correctly – the return of votes – showing Pelosi with an 80% lead over candidate Dennis in the 8th district, one district that is gerrymandered to the point where Pelosi might as well have the ability to name her own successor. That said, different race, different year – the same odds however, apply to the newly formed 12th District – which Pelosi inherited when California, not unlike Massachusetts had to reshuffle the Congressional seats due to population loss. In Massachusetts, for example, Barney Frank became the sacrificial lamb (so to speak) when the Democrats on the Hill, had to restructure 10 districts into 9 – the result one of them had to have more conservatives (yes, in Massachusetts) than others – the district give to Barney Frank looked a lot different, with a majority of the large urban areas sliced away, and central Massachusetts (the reddest part of the bluest state east) included in the mix. Frank resigned – he had run a tough race for re-election against Sean Beilat – the race projected by the New York Times as a blow-out for Frank, by 75% of the vote, ended up a tad closer, at a 10 point lead. That said the former 8th district did indeed go to Nancy Pelosi – pre-redistricting.

The 8th district includes – San Francisco – Bay view Excelsior and Presidio. The 12th district now includes Outer Sunset and the Sunset District, a bit broader, but the Times continue to call the seat – “Safe Democrat”. They also have the Massachusetts 6th, with the Tierney-Tisei match up “Safe Democrat”, that said, a recent poll shows the Republican running away with the District. Go figure.

The 8th District results in 2010 showed Speaker Pelosi garnering 157,000 votes to John Dennis’s 33,000 (California Secretary of State) – and considering that in San Francisco County (the 8th District) -461,768 are eligible to vote, with 259,808 Democrats, 44,003 Republicans, 136,000 registered as not stating, and the balance a jumble of parties. The point being, that less than a third of those eligible to vote showed up at the polls. (Secretary of State, CA)

Therefore there may be an opportunity here for John Dennis to pick up the Disenfranchised, Democrats, as well as “declined to states” add a few Republicans and unseat Nancy.

The campaign released a new video – shown below – a bit quirky, but isn’t that what San Francisco is all about? – Those 4 million jobs Nancy is referring to as being created, hardly enough to push down the 8% unemployment rate nationally – however, Dennis and CO kept it light focusing instead on domestic surveillance issues – but again, he’s a Libertarian, and what’s not to like about a Libertarian?

There is likely to be zero polls out the district, and Dennis appears to be a serious challenger – in a year where the polls are based on the prior election (2010 for Congress – 2008 for the President), there are some factors to consider: Redistricting is one of the biggies, no one is apparently talking about – while talking heads use outdated district maps to back up 2008 and 2010 return of votes as a predictive indicator. One would be cautioned to wait until the dust settles, However, Dennis needs a ground game in the City-District, and poll watchers, and of course, someone to keep an eye on the bay, where most of the ballots may end up if they are not favorable to Ms. Pelosi.

(Basing that on MA and CT shenanigans.)

He’s got a sense of humor, grant him that.

One last thought, on almost every single race, and every single poll, the media is now noting (Politico) that it is those with blinders on that cannot see an across the board win for Democrats in November – The polls simply cannot be wrong. (See: Poltico article on parallel universe) Further, that those who insist that the polls are somehow skewed in favor of the incumbent Democrat (pick one) are living in la-la- land. Of course, they do not consider that there is some math to factor into the mix. The following apparently makes sense to those in the media. Based on a 2008 electorate, polls are correct, because in 2008 there were 8% more Registered Democrats at the polls, the Republican’s were outmatched by the Democrats and Independents, an almost equal number trended Democrat. Further they used the 2008 Congressional elections to predict house and senate races in 2010. They were shocked when they work up and found historic gains by Republican’s in the House. The math is what is at fault, and since they no longer teach basic math skills to the majority - they assume, that 8 points or more will magically appear. One has to be delusional to believe that can happen. One would be better served to poll based on election statistics from the 2010 election, of course, the results are far less favorable, and with redistricting, that takes a great deal of county by county predictions right off the table, unless someone is actually polling the District or State for the Senate Race and not using 2008 models.

Which is why the nation was shocked when a day before the November 1980 elections Jimmy Carter was tied with Ronald Reagan, and the results just didn’t jive because Regan won! Shocker! – Gallup in explaining the differential once the dust settled simply stated, there was a change in enrollment in political parties from the prior election that weren’t factored into the polls. (Google News Archives).

Really?

Check out the video below – Personal Note, a Libertarian in Congress would far better serve the nation, as they are independent of major party affiliation... If one is in the Califonria12th, visit http://www.johndennis2012.com/, maybe make a donation, be part of history, get him a ground game. Find those 250,000 missing voters who stayed home and get them to the polls for Dennis.

Romney and Obama The Money Game – From “Romney Hood” to Reid and Pelosi's "Dirty Politics"

Obama and Romney - All About the Cash - image: darkgovernment.com (a blog about government waste)

The American Political Landscape has become one in which fundraising for campaigns continues to rule the news – the race to build the bigger “war chest” to best an opponent has run amok – the Boston Globe reports on the fact that for the third straight month, Mitt Romney’s Campaign has outraised the Obama Campaign – the headline ”Romney Trounces Obama in Fundraising for 3rd month”, begins with the question: “Can President Barack Obama raise the money he needs to hold onto the White House?”and goes on to speak of the Romney’s advantage in fundraising has brought about the unthinkable –

“While the race for voter support is tight, according to polls, Romney's robust fundraising and a crush of money from Republican-leaning political action committees have forced the president's campaign to spend heavily through the summer.”

(Boston Globe)

How much money have both candidates raised in one month? – According to the Globe, Romney at $101 million to Obama’s $75 million – both men drawing money from those who “have”, and some who “have not”. Those who have, according to the President, on the fundraising trail in Connecticut’s “wealth belt” – speaking to the “haves”, the President suggested that Romney was like “Romney-Hood”. The New York Times reporting that the President hopes that his new, easy to repeat, mantra, will take hold. It is based on one study that suggested Romney’s tax plan would raise taxes on the middle class, and favor those who had more – similar to the current tax plan if that were the case - the exact quote: “It’s like Robin Hood in reverse – it’s Romney Hood,” Mr. Obama told supporters at a fund-raiser in Stamford, Conn.” (New York Times).

It might stick, or it might not – especially since other efforts to play dirty have appeared to backfire – Romney continues to outpace the President in individual donors (or those who have not yet reached the Federal maximum, as well as those who are able to give unlimited funds, businessmen, having small to large companies are giving to Romney. On the other hand Hollywood and some on Wall Street give to the Obama Campaign (See fundraising in Connecticut – a combination of Hollywood east and the railway to Wall Street. The Obama campaign also has individual donors, but has not come close to the 2008 election haul.

It makes one wonder, who is listening? The press has been extremely negative on Mitt Romney – as expected, and yet that has, to date, failed to make a dent – (Google Mitt Romney in Google News, and one finds one negative after the next, the latest being Mitt Romney’s Religion. Mitt Romney and the Mormon Culture – from the Washington Post, is the number two headline this morning on Google news.)

Therefore, as the difference between the two “war chests” is a source of consternation for the Obama team – they put Harry Reid to work, along with Nancy Pelosi to back up Reid, who suggested that “an unnamed source” told him that Mitt Romney did not pay taxes for ten years, Nancy Pelosi chipped in and suggested Reid spoke “the truth”. These outrageous statements are so ridiculous that even the Chicago Tribune weighed in suggesting Reid was similar to a birther! (Those who believe that the President was not born in the U.S.), by stating the absurd based on pulling something “out of thin air”. – The kicker:

Someday, Reid will say something important that he genuinely wants Americans to believe. After this episode, they'll probably ignore him. We found ourselves nodding in agreement Monday with the opinion of Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen, no right-wing nut he: "The politics of this squabble are delightful. But Reid has managed to draw both his party and his president into the gutter with him. ... The soaring rhetoric that Obama used in his first campaign has come to ground in the mud of Harry Reid's latter-day McCarthyism."

(The Chicago Tribune)

What’s a party to do that’s losing the “money game”? – Simple: Attack the Candidate who has the most money by attacking the donors! The Jerusalem Post’s, “Defending Sheldon Adelson’s Support for Mitt Romney”, speaks to the negatives being heaped on Mr. Adelson: “These same Democrats are silent when big wigs pump big money into their own favorite candidates’ campaigns.(Jerusalem Post)

One thing that the disparity in fund-raising does tell us, is the difference between donors – those businessmen, who create jobs, and those small donors who may or may not have a job, are giving what they can to Mitt Romney, while the President is fundraising in artistic circles – the “celebrity” circles, and those small donors who support the President and his policies. The polls, which have shown a tight race since the beginning, given the divided nature of the nation when comes to “Party Identity” rather than political ideology, suggest that the need to sway voters is what drives the campaigns to seek out those who “have” more often. In the end however, all the mud-slinging aside, all the reporting aside, it will be the 5% of the population that decides who will be the next President – unless, of course, the polls change once the glow of summer has faded into fall and the voting public begins to make up its collective mind and decide for whom they will vote in earnest. Will all the negative advertising help? To date, it appears to have done little to change the polls. It seems to some, such a waste, when millions in this nation are unemployed, or underemployed, or on fixed incomes – all being squeezed by rising costs – of everything. Would it not be a more perfect world – if the candidates were chosen on accomplishments, rhetorical skills, and the public square speeches and both candidates donating the campaign cash not spent, but stockpiled, to those who “have not?” Indeed that’s utopian, and in the long-run would not be American Politics – where, according to, and fueled by, the press, (going back decades) money talks, and the candidate with the most “Cash” wins. In the case of this election, where one candidate is obviously preferred over another by the same press, the shock and excuses regarding Mitt Romney’s continued fundraising ability, is apparent, and transparent, as are the attacks on Mr. Adelson, yet they persist. Yet, according to some pundits, this election will be based on the economy, those who have not - ironic.

House Dems Vote To Kill Business in Political Stunt Expected to Prompt December 15th Market Crash – The New “Red Menace”

Food lines in Utopia read article Communist Food Lines

From The Hill: Yesterday the House of Representatives voted 234-188 on extending the Bush Tax cuts to those who earn under $250,000, leaving business on the hook for paying higher taxes in 2011. The vote, with Speaker Nancy Pelosi (soon to be Minority Leader), closed the voting process with her approval, receiving somewhat tepid applause. 20 Democrats voted with the Republicans in opposition. In simple terms, with business seeing tax increases coming down the pike at a rapid pace, they will simply not hire, extending the misery of more than 15,000,000 people who are unemployed. Some businesses may just pickup and move to more “tax friendly’ countries, or close entirely, adding additional claims to unemployment rolls. Could they have voted to extend the tax cuts, in whole or in part, in the last 5 years that Nancy Pelosi has controlled the Congress? Absolutely, they certainly had the time to do so, but it was not politically convenient to extend part or all or none of the tax cuts, or write new legislation during that period.

Perhaps Ms. Pelosi feels that it will be easier to blame Republicans coming into office in 2011, for the new taxes that will be paid by all American’s, thereby tarnishing the Republicans (who have not yet taken the majority) with the brush of having voted against the middle class, in the hopes of reviving their own political fortunes in 2012. When one looks at the reality of the political process, and the short time between elections, Pelosi and her cohorts are already announcing, in some cases, their intent to run for reelection, in the hopes of gaining back control of the Government. However, no matter how hard they will attempt to spin this one, the fact of the matter is, without the employers, and without the employed, all government funding will cease to exist.
The utopian ideology shared by the Speaker and the administration so enamored of an “equitable social “share the wealth” option, perhaps forgot, ignored, or were simply ignorant of the fact that the model where the government controls industry, retail, food, insurance, and the like, has not worked – on a large scale in a country bigger than say Austria. Russia collapsed under the system, with worker standing in line for bread and simples supplies. Capitalism, which, last time anyone looked still was the guiding principle behind American economics, allows for individuals to create businesses at will, hire people, pay taxes, and keep the payroll going, to both the individual , the corporation (small or large) and the federal and state governments. By raising taxes on struggling businesses, many of which, like GE (who owns NBC and MSNBC) received bailouts by the Fed (Washington Post), will have the effect of instituting a dnr on the nations Federal income.

How bad can it get? US News and World Report, notes that without the full Bush Tax Cuts the market is set to crash in two short weeks. Should the market crash, as predicted, that will wipe out life savings, stall and or kill business, and leave the nation in a state similar to the 1930’s, with one exception. In the 30’s there were not millions of people who were used to receiving SNAP (food stamp credit cards), Fuel Assistance, Welfare, Social Security Disability for the inability to speak English, and a host of other programs which are controlled by the same party whose level of incompetence appears to have no boundaries. In the 1930’s, people received handouts from the government in the form of workfare, and yes, there were riots in the street, most notably by those whose political ideology most closely matched the current Speaker and the Administration – it was politely dubbed “The Red Menace”. Therefore, the New Red Menace lies in the Administration, the Current Congress, and their Unions. The rioters may come, indeed, but the blame will be placed, not as intended, but rather on those who were unable to provide – the current administration.


To recap – there is a direct correlation between giving businesses and the middle class tax cuts, and the ability to offer “aid” to the homeless, banks, and Europe - it works, splendidly - however when one places 90% of the tax burden on those earning 250,000 plus, one is treated to a depression. In the 1970’s, industries moved south, “the Sun Belt”, not for the climate, but for the tax rates, leaving those tax and spend Northern States (most notably Massachusetts) and their high corporate tax rates, without industry to pay for the increased entitlements. People left in droves for states where jobs were available, and taxes were lower, and over the years, instead of figuring out this simple equation, the need for Governors such as Dukakis and Patrick to tax and then add more programs which are unsustainable due to lack of a)corporations and b) taxpayers continues unabated.

This is the result: In Georgia hundreds of people waited in line to receive fuel assistance as the temperatures dropped below 30, the agency which receives federal funding had to turn people away. Those people standing in line were there for fuel assistance, spoke to the heart of the problem: (AJC):

“We have assistance for food, we have assistance for clothing, but we don’t have assistance for diapers,” she said. “That’s my biggest struggle right now.”

Therefore, we have millions upon millions who are getting their food and clothing from the State (Fed) now, (not to mention housing, cell phones, cars, Triple A (see Massachusetts), looking for additional funds to heat their homes.

Sooner than later, the practice of trying to buy the votes of these virtual “welfare slaves”, will come to a bad end – when there are no taxpayers, or few taxpayers left to support both those recipients and the government who misleads them into believing that the cash comes from the Federal Government. - they should be thanking taxpayers, not Nancy Pelosi, for their ability to stay for years on the “public dole”.

What if the market does crash on the 15th of December? American’s will survive, we’ve done it before, and we will do so again. However, the Progressives will not learn, they will continue to push for a version of Soviet Russia that has been immortalized as successful in their minds, eschewing fact for a fictional utopia of bread and soup lines and badly built appliances, generational apartment living (as there will be no home ownership except for those “elite” who are at the top of the political class.
Which is why, historically, the nation will recover, the prosperity will return, and those ideologies will sit by on the sidelines, the university professors, the actors, actresses, GE, NBC, MSNBC, Manhattan socialites, and ponder how to bring back their brand of sanity to the “world”, in another 40 years or so.

Just a note of moderation: During the past few year certain talk show hosts have predicted one catastrophe after another, the last was the possibility that the mid-terms might not take place if there were an emergency– that did not happen, obviously. Therefore, what American’s do have is the power of the ballot box, and the ability to see through the vain and the stupid, and the uninformed and the greedy, in order to affect the change necessary to restore the nation, at least temporarily. When listening to zealots, be the politicians, professors, high school teachers, union reps, the President or a right wing talk show host consistently predicating disaster, keep in mind who benefits: The politicians maintain their jobs and power, the professors maintain the same, the teachers are fed by the unions (not quite as elite as the others) and that talk show host is making millions scaring the heck of out anyone who takes their word as “gospel”.

Debunking: it has never been this bad:

Nationwide bombings and riots in the 1920’s
List of riots (Union) in the 1930’s
Progressive education in the 1930’s, leads to 40’s backlash
Photo essay (brilliant) of the 1930’s food lines, poverty, et. al

Of import:
U.S. Population in the 1930’s
U.S. Population in 2010

Adjust for inflation

Something to ponder:

In the last census, the U.S. Population stood at approximately 308.4 million (figure US News/US Census), of which approximately 50% pay no taxes. Compare to the US of 1930 of 122,775,046, of which even the lowest income level paid 5% to the federal till. (Tax Foundation)


Note: Congress had 5 years under Nancy Pelosi to tweak or fix, with her Tax Men, Charles Rangel (censored) and Richard Neal (D-MA2) the tax code, however, they waited until the most inopportune time for American’s thinking of their own political hides.

Washington Post Op-Ed – Obama Should Not Seek Reelection in 2012 – Who’s To Blame for Obama’s Woes

John Kerry, one of the first to endorse Barack Obama, also was instrumental in the making of Obama's Presidency - image Washington Post

An editorial written by Pat Caddell and Doug Schoen suggests that President Barack Obama should not seek reelection in 2012, instead using the time to focus on cutting the deficit and eliminating entitlements “without constantly worrying about the reactions of senior citizens, lobbyists and unions.” The criticism has been coming from the two aforementioned for some time, with piece in the Wall Street Journal this past July entitled “Our Divisive President”. Both men, long-time Democrat pollsters, are understandably frustrated after the historic gains made by Republicans in the 2010 mid-terms, and begin the op-ed piece by citing Obamaisms over the past month; from his calling Republicans “enemies” during an interview with an Hispanic radio personality, to his remark about making “mid-term corrections” to the possibility of “working with Republicans”, the two pundits bring home the nature of the President who would prefer to campaign than govern. In addition, while calling on Obama to Step aside, they do so insinuating that he would have a chance to become, historically, a well-respected, President. With all due respect to these august pundits, that ploy is as transparent as dangling a carrot on a stick in front of a rabbit.

Is it fair, to ask the President to step aside for the good of his party? The fact that Barack Obama was propelled to the Office of the Presidency with little experience outside of campaigning should have been worrisome to these pollsters and pundits who now are heavily criticizing the man. The fact that overwhelmingly a group of top Democrats led by Nancy Pelosi during the Democrat Convention in 2008 propped up Obama over Clinton with the use of Super Delegate votes should have been an issue. Although to be sure, the media has played its part in propping up the community organizer, turned three term Illinois State Senator (after the loss of a Congressional Race), turned part-term Senator, turned President with lighting speed, who else is to blame but those who put him in the limelight in the first place?

John Kerry, (D-MA) brought the young Illinois State Senator, to the 2004 Democrat convention the year Kerry ran against George W. Bush, Obama took the convention by storm. It could have been the comparison between the candidate for President, Kerry, and the young, energetic, Barack Obama, that got those in a position and desperate to take back the White House at any cost, begin to think that Obama would fit the mold. The problem with American politics and the notion of a President being more popular than capable has been the bane of the Democrats, with a few glaring exceptions, since the 1930’s, with Republican candidates that win or lose, being the exact opposite of the “almost “rock star” status that those who run on the Democrat ticket (or are brought to the ticket)
exude.

It takes a national crisis, or the economy in tatters, for a Republican to gain the White House and that is regardless of how well-spoken or photogenic the individual may be. Veteran Democrat pollsters and politicos’ surely see 2012 as being yet another nightmare for the Democrats, with more Senate Seats to Defend in 2012, as well as the potential for further losses in the Congress - there appears to be only one solution – take out the figurehead, the President who is also the Head of the Democrat Party (in title only). That still leaves the woman American’s love to dismiss, Nancy Pelosi (a boon to Republicans if she maintains her power, and it appears she will), while, making room for another, more experience, less divisive individual to run on the Democrat Presidential Ticket. Should Obama step down, the floor opens to a cast of hopefuls, like to run, and that would, in all likelihood be one Hillary Clinton (the one who actually won the popular vote in 2008, but was cast aside by Super Delights). Certainly there would be the usual cast of characters to fill in the debates, however, it makes the transition to the candidacy and the Whet House a lot easier, than it would to challenge a sitting President. It can, however be done.

Unfortunately, Barack Obama, not unlike Jimmy Carter, came up through the ranks with little experience and a great deal of public relations smoke and mirrors, which made them appear to be the most attractive candidate to a public that seeks “star power” from its leaders. Is it no wonder Obama is all over the map, and that the certain pollsters and others on the left are now trying to figure out how to get out of this gracefully (or not, see rumors coming from the left about the Presidents meltdown and possible removal under the 25th amendment.) in order to maintain control of the Executive Branch?

Should the powers that be, those donors and others who pull the strings for the DNC, decide that Obama is Carter redux, then it opens the door for safe, less telegenic, less controversial moderates to take the field, and then possibly the White House. What this tells us, is that political parties, and those whose allegiance to a party, are rather mercenary when it comes to maintaining power at all cost, using individual’s that may or may not have the capacity to run a Grinder Shop, on the one hand to gain the White House, only to push them aside for a less divisive figure, one who is capable, perhaps. It remains to be seen who will be the candidates that these pollsters decide would be the one to a) stop the hemorrhaging of remaining House and Senate seats currently in the Democrat column, while having the ability to take on the GOP with an option of winning the Whet House in 2012. One can certainly not rule out one Hillary Clinton, who, as previously mentioned, should have been sitting at Pennsylvania Avenue since 2008, which leaves many moderates certain that the House and the Senate would not be in play, and the Democrats would never have suffered such an inglorious defeat in the mid-terms.

David Axelrod on CNN on Deval Patrick – Lowering Expectations for the Massachusetts Governor

In a CNN video posted to Real Clear Politics David Axelrod, White House Advisor, and reported Obama’s campaign manager for reelection in 2012, reviewed the mid-term elections. The Headline ”Axelrod Suggests Dem Upset: "Stay Up For The Full Night" suggests, according to CNN that Axelrod appears somewhat misleading, as Axelrod rambles through questions posed by CNN’s John King noting: “as I said, I think you're going to see an -- an election where, you know, people win who perhaps you didn't expect to win, people lose who -- who, perhaps, you didn't expect to lose on -- on both sides.”

However, the interview begins with a discussion on which races Axelrod will be watching, and the East Coast is discussed first, specifically, Axelrod’s former client and alleged test for Obama’s 2008 victory,Deval Patrick. Paraphrased from the video below: “Deval, an old client of mine, spectacular person, Massachusetts has elected Republican governors for 16 years before he arrived, so that’s a competitive race.”…

After that quip, Axelrod goes into the discussion regarding surprises the night of the election and highlights the California Governor’s race as an example. Axelrod suggests that spending $200 million dollars might just clinch the deal for Democrat Jerry Brown against Meg Whitman. That’s apparently all he has right at the moment.

Meanwhile, back in the Bay State, the three man race for the Governor’s seat is in its final two weeks, with Democrat turned Independent, Tim Cahill going to the 10 point range, in the latest poll from Suffolk University. The poll released on October 14th and taken between the 10th and 12th of September, suggests that the electorate was far from a commitment on any candidate. On question 17: where do you stand on the race at this point, one finds Patrick at 44%, Baker at 37% and Cahill at 10% (with the balance either undecided, Green Party, etc.). On Question 18 however, when those leaner’s are asked who they would vote for if the election were held today? – There is a startling difference: Patrick receives 6%, Baker 12%, and Cahill 2%, with a whopping 49% refusing to answer or not sure. The results of the poll which were released were the combination of the two questions, gives Patrick a somewhat artificial edge. That said, with a pollster that repeatedly includes 8% of it staff (Suffolk University) in the mix, one has to ask, how accurate can this poll be? Consider it is doubtful that 8% of the Massachusetts electorate resides on the Suffolk campus. (See screen shot below).


Section of Marginal from Suffolk Poll showing larger percentage of undecideds only two weeks away - deduct 8 points for Suffolk only participants - click to enlarge


It is more than likely that internal polling on the Patrick team suggests the gig is up, which is why Axelrod was softening the “blow” so to speak when reviewing the Massachusetts Electorate. One can bet the House (literally) that he will also have his eyes on the Bay State’s 9 Congressional races, which, as of this point, don’t appear to be heading in a direction pleasing to Axelrod and Company. Axelrod, who is certain that Mitt Romney will run in 2012, could not have missed that Romney’s PAC recently endorsed certain Congressional Candidates, including Sean Bielat, running against Barney Frank and Tom Wesley, running against Richard Neal. The move on Romney's Part can be viewed in two ways:one, the man is a businessman first, and would not waste a dime, and two; it goes toward building political capital for the future.

As races either tighten up or completely blow out in normally “Blue States” such as Illinois and Massachusetts, one has to begin to realize that the electorate, in larger measures (according to a WSJ/NBC pollwould prefer to elect a candidate that has not held office before, that would, perhaps explain why seasoned politicians, such as Nancy Pelosi and Richard Neal, have ducked debates, and have become almost invisible in their home districts, even though they were responsible for taking a break to campaign and not voting on the extension of tax cuts. Axelrod is a smart man, and looks more pained than confident in this particular CNN clip.

Axelrod on CNN

2010 Election Recession - Pelosi and Democrat Leadership Begs Lawmakers for Unpaid DCCC Dues – Pelosi’s Last FEC Filing Cash On Hand Only $214,046?

Politico: Democrat House Leadership, lead by Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has written a letter “to lawmakers beseeching them to either pony up their unpaid dues to the DCCC or commit to raising more money for the party from their own donors.” the letter went on to imply that unless members pay their dues, the leadership will be forced to choose which incumbents to aid in the upcoming election. The article closes with the fact that several house members have millions in reserves, which could be shared in an attempt to keep the four year old Democrat majority in the Congress.

That said, with a 9.6 unemployment rate going into September and employers across the country implementing hiring freezes and reductions in benefits it may be difficult for any politician to raise funds needed to spend the millions on advertising deemed necessary to win an election.

Even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s “war chest” has fallen to a cash on hand of $214, 046 based on the last Federal Election Commissions data available. The last data filed for the California 8th district, appears to be from June of 2010, therefore, there may be some changes with filings that were due as follows: the July (Quarterly)filing, due the 15th of July and or the August filing, due August 20th (Monthly).




In either event, going into a general election, as Speaker of the House, Ms. Pelosi’s finances should be as healthy as some of her troops noted in the Politico article:

As of their latest filings with the Federal Election Commission, Rep. Frank Pallone of New Jersey had $4.1 million, Ed Markey of Massachusetts had $3.4 million, Allyson Schwartz of Pennsylvania had $3.3 million, Lloyd Doggett of Texas had $3.2 million, Richard Neal of Massachusetts had $3 million, Brad Sherman of California had $2.8 million, Jerry Costello of Illinois had $2.5 million, Bennie Thompson of Mississippi had $2.1 million, and Carolyn Maloney of New York had $2 million. (Maloney, for her part, is locked in a contested primary on Manhattan's Upper East Side.)

(Note: Richard Neal cash on hand actual $2.9 Million, with a mere $177,067.20 received and reported in the third quarterly. Neal, who is also facing a tough re-election, is also lobbying for the Chair of the House Ways and Means Committee (should the Democrats hold the house, which, as of today, appears unlikely). For a powerhouse like Neal to “rake in” under $200,000 in one quarter is telling. In addition, there has been little news since July of Democrat icon, President Bill Clinton coming into Springfield, MA to stump for the endangered Neal )

The fact that House Leadership under the Democrats are also those who approve the administration’s policies and literally “write the checks” for projects, and implement taxes, the state of the economy lays directly with the Congress and those who have held power since 2006 (Democrats).

With funding down, perhaps those that are up for reelection, such as Pelosi, Frank, Neal and the balance of the Democrats (and Republicans) up for reelection will have to go door to door, the old fashioned way, to convince voters that they deserve to keep their jobs. There may be good reason way some of those, such as Neal, who have sizable “war chests” are holding onto them – they may need them to try and regain seats lost this year.

Nancy Pelosi Up For Reelection in 2010 – Voices Solidarity With Those Who Would Investigate Opposition to NYC Mosque - Audio

Nancy Pelosi, (D-CA 8), in an interview with KCBS San Francisco, was asked about the controversy over the building of a Mosque on Ground Zero – in response, Pelosi noted that it was not up to her, rather her colleagues in New York. She did not stop there, however, but went on to express the need to “investigate” who was funding opposition to the building of this mosque. The audio link is below as well as on KBCS.

Pelosi, who is up for reelection this year, is busy stumping in her home district. She will be facing John Dennis (www.johndennis2010.com), the Republican candidate for the 8th Congressional District. Although most pundits would note that Mr. Dennis does not stand a chance in Hades in besting Ms. Nancy, there is increasing angst in Pelosi’s district, and Mr. Dennis represents an opportunity for those moderate Democrats and the growing number of independents to send Pelosi packing. Dennis, who leans towards Libertarian ideals, is well liked in the district, even getting a nod from the Bay Area Reporter as an alternative, noting that Pelosi has lost the all important Bay Area LBGT support. Donations can be made to Dennis’ campaign here at www.johndennis2010.com/donate.

One must recall that one little-known Commonwealth Senator by the name of Scott Brown, was down 15 points (according to a Boston Globe poll) less than a week prior to the peoples victory in the Bay State, that, in this opinion, was just the beginning – even the bluest of states can show that reason trumps blind political ideology when push comes to shove.

AUDIO FROM KCBS HERE