Click on WORD or PDF for full content
Michael Barone reviews recent polls that could indicate historic change in Congressional seats. He also looks at a few specific races.
…However, Gallup also shows the results for two different turnout models. Under its “high turnout model” Republicans lead 53%-40%. Under its “low turnout model” Republicans lead 56%-38%.
These two numbers, if translated into popular votes in the 435 congressional districts, suggest huge gains for Republicans and a Republican House majority the likes of which we have not seen since the election cycles of 1946 or even 1928. For months, people have been asking me if this year looks like ’94. My response is that the poll numbers suggest it looks like 1994, when Republicans gained 52 seats in a House of 435 seats. Or perhaps somewhat better for Republicans and worse for Democrats. The Gallup high turnout and low turnout numbers suggest it looks like 1894, when Republicans gained more than 100 seats in a House of approximately 350 seats.
Having said that, caution is in order. Gallup’s numbers tend to be volatile. Its procedures for projecting likely turnout are very sensitive to transitory responses. They’re useful in identifying shifts in the balance of enthusiasm. But they can overstate the swings to one party or the other. Scott Rasmussen’s latest generic ballot numbers among likely voters show Republicans with only a 45%-42% lead, much less than the 48%-38% lead he reported two days ago. That’s based on a three-day average, indicating Democrats fared relatively well on the most recent night of interviewing. Perhaps Barack Obama’s attempts to gin up enthusiasm among Democratic voters are bearing fruit. Or perhaps one night’s results were an anomaly. …
John Fund comments on the change in tune from the Dems.
…Democrats I spoke with last night downplayed the Gallup numbers, pointing out that Gallup’s surveys have been somewhat volatile this year and other polls (such as those by Scott Rasmussen) show a much smaller GOP edge among likely voters, on the order of three percentage points. That would translate into a GOP House gain of 35 to 40 seats, hovering just around what Republican would need to take control of the Speaker’s gavel.
But regardless of where likely voters are right now, it’s a strange political year when Democrats start consoling themselves with Scott Rasmussen, whose polls they have long disparaged as being biased towards Republicans.
Nile Gardiner also blogs about the polling news, in the Telegraph Blogs, UK.
Over the weekend I wrote a piece on how some liberal elites, not least at The New York Times, remain in denial over the scale of the disaster the Left is facing at the polls in November. Well, I hope they’re taking a close look today at the latest Gallup poll, which is enough to make any White House adviser weep.
Gallup’s new survey of more than 3,000 adults, including over 2,700 registered voters (1,800 of whom are highly likely to vote), shows Republicans with “a double-digit advantage” under two separate scenarios – lower and higher turnout. Under the higher turnout scenario, the GOP lead is 13 percentage points, while under the lower turnout scenario it is even higher, at 18 points…
…If Gallup’s poll prove correct on November 2nd, which of course remains nearly a month away, the scale of the Republican victory will be absolutely huge. There is no doubt about it – Gallup’s latest survey is explosive, and points to history in the making for the latest conservative revolution to hit America.
Rep. Paul Ryan is interviewed by National Review’s Robert Costa about fiscal reform.
Earlier this year, Rep. Paul Ryan, a 40-year-old Republican congressman from Wisconsin, published “A Roadmap for America’s Future,” his blueprint for balancing the budget. Despite much fanfare, Ryan’s proposal — which rigorously tackles federal entitlements, taxes, and spending — was left out of the House GOP’s “Pledge to America.” The omission, he says, does not signal a retreat by him or his party. …
…Ryan says that his GOP colleagues on the Budget Committee are stalwart in their commitment to entitlement reform. “The culture on the Budget Committee is great,” he says. “Anybody who studies this problem or digs deep into the numbers is seriously frightened about the future of this country. They realize the urgency of the moment. After a sober review of the fiscal condition of this country, most people just put politics aside.”
“I spend a lot of my time looking at these baselines,” Ryan says. “Most people don’t know this stuff. Most people in Congress don’t understand just how quickly our fiscal situation has deteriorated. And now the Left thinks that you can keep raising taxes, as if there were no consequences to that.” To fight back, Ryan says Republicans need to focus on two things: “economic growth and reforming the structure of spending.” …
Robert Samuelson discusses the importance of entrepreneurs to the economy.
…American workers are roughly split between firms with less or more than 500 employees. In healthy times, older companies of all sizes do create lots of jobs. But they also lose jobs, as some businesses shrink or vanish. On balance, job creation and destruction cancel each other. All the net job increases occur among startups, finds a study of the 1992-2005 period by economists John Haltiwanger of the University of Maryland and Ron Jarmin and Javier Miranda of the Census Bureau. Because most startups are necessarily small, this gives a statistical edge to tinier firms in job creation. But, the study says, the effect entirely reflects the impact of new businesses.
… Panner, a registered Democrat, criticizes complex accounting, employment, and health care regulations imposed by federal and state agencies that consume scarce investment funds and time. The fragmented system of business oversight imposes a bureaucratic bias, perhaps unintended, on startups. Any one rule or tax may seem justifiable; but the collective effect can be crushing.
It’s all about risk-taking. The good news is that the entrepreneurial instinct seems deeply ingrained in the nation’s economic culture. Americans like to create; they’re ambitious; many want to be “their own bosses”; many crave fame and fortune. (Panner is already involved with a new startup, TownFlier. It has five employees.) The bad news is that venture capital for startups is scarce and political leaders seem largely oblivious to burdensome government policies. This needs to be addressed. Entrepreneurship won’t instantly cure America’s jobs’ deficit, but without it, there will be no strong recovery.