Rep Steve Vaillancourt


Will GOP Convention Cost Scott Brown The Senate Seat?

Apparently I wasn't the only Republican to disagree with right wing zealots who dominated Saturday's New Hampshire party convention.  Remember this.

NH Republicans Push Freedom...Except For Gay People
 2 days ago - As expected, New Hampshire Republicans, at their state conventionearlier ... Republicans believe in freedom for everyone except their gay 
  • Now, Politico is reporting how the abortion plank is already coming back to haunt U.S. Senate candidate Scott Brown.   A little ol' state Rep from Ward 8 Manchester (that would be I) means very little, but this story going national could well cost Republicans an important pick-up in the United States Senate.  Time will tell, but it's going to be a losing week for Brown thanks to this, and every week you spend on defense is a week you can't spend pointing out how Jeanne Shaheen votes with Barack Obama 99 percent of the time and how she was the decisive vote for the ever unpopular Obamacare.  No wonder N.H. state party officials declined to offer a comment on the story; clearly, they'd like it to just go away.  

    This should be especially troubling for Party Chair Jennifer "the First" Horn who spent much of last week threatening Republicans who even considered supporting a Democrat (Chris Pappas, a far better candidate than Bob Burns for Executive Council in the Manchester area).  What's she going to do now?  Say that Scott Brown isn't a proper Republican?


    Talk about wishing your dirty laundry in public!  

    Talk about the lunatics running the asylum!  (But guess what; they're undoubtedly too ignorant to realize--or even care about--the harm they've done),

    Democratic Chair Ray Buckley, he of the nasty one liner and ever-present smirk, couldn't have done more to hurt Reublicans than these overzealous Republican delegates (only you can decide if the word neanderthal truly applies). Just wait till the media gets a hold of the anti-gay language.


    An A.P. reporter was asking me for the exact language today. I don't have it.  Does anyone?  Certainly Jen can't keep it hidden forever, and as we should have learned long ago with Richard Nixon, a cover-up only makes things much worse).

    In the immortal words of the great J.D. Clampett (of the Beverly Hills Clampetts), "Pitiful...pitiful."


    Scott Brown splits with New Hampshire GOP on abortion

    Republican Scott Brown speaks. | AP Photo

    New Hampshire Republican officials declined to respond to Brown's break from platform. | AP Photo

    Republican Scott Brown has something to run against besides Democrat Jeanne Shaheen: His state GOP’s abortion stance.

    The New Hampshire Republican Party adopted Saturday a socially conservative party platform that supports “the pre-born child’s fundamental right to life and person-hood under the Fourteenth Amendment” as well as the “Life at Conception Act.” Those policies are at odds with the New Hampshire GOP’s Senate nominee’s stances on abortion, and Brown’s Democratic opponent Shaheen attacked him on Monday for the “disturbing” message sent by the New Hampshire Republicans.

    In an emailed statement, a Brown aide made clear that the former Massachusetts senator does not agree with the personhood language, which defines life as starting at conception and grants fetuses the same rights as human beings.

    “Scott Brown is pro-choice and will protect a woman’s right to choose,” Brown spokeswoman Elizabeth Guyton said.

    In a highly critical statement, Shaheen said she saw little daylight between the party’s activist base in New Hampshire and Brown’s position.

    “They are dangerously wrong, and by signing on with Tea Party extremists, they’re showing just how irresponsibly out of touch they are with the needs and rights of women,” Shaheen said.

    The race between Brown and Shaheen has tightened in the polls recently — and become increasingly nasty as Brown lobs attacks at Shaheen’s immigration position. The two agreed Monday to three televised debates in late October, though Brown is pushing for more.

    New Hampshire Republican officials declined to respond to messages about the party platform throughout the day on Monday. New Hampshire reporter James Pindell tweeted that the media was booted out of the bylaws portion of the party convention Saturday — and the 2014 party platform is still not publicly available, though it has been discussed extensively by GOP activists in social media shared with POLITICO. The party platform currently posted on the website is from 2012.

    The personhood issue is affecting several close Senate races like Colorado, where Republican Rep. Cory Gardner has disavowed his earlier support for the language and is now aggressively backing over-the-counter contraceptive availability. And Rep. Bruce Braley (D-Iowa) has attacked Republican opponent Joni Ernst for supporting the language as a state lawmaker; Ernst has also emphasized her support for birth control.

    Read more:


    The Race For Speaker--Greg Moore Wounds O'Brien

    Once and most likely future (?) NH House Speaker, either Gene Chandler (above) or Bill O'Brien.
    The talk around the hallways of the State House last Wednesday was not at all about Governor Maggie Hassan's vetoes; there was very little chance that any of them would be over-ridden.

    Quite to the contrary, everyone was asking me to weigh in on the race for New Hampshire Speaker.  While I'd actually prefer to write about the U.S. Senate, I realize the main stream media is handling that quite well thank you; Fox News seems to be wheeling our Karl Rove on a daily basis to push the Republican line.

    While the race for Speaker is more an "inside baseball" story, I fully realize I probably have some "dope" here that few others have, so I'll share it here, and you can decide how much you want to know.

    My answer when asked to rate the chances of Gene Chandler vs. Bill O'Brien (and let's face it, Republicans will have such firm control that no Democrat need apply; sorry Steve Shurtleff, but that's the truth) is the same as it was lat summer.  If Republicans take less than 250 seats, the odds will favor Chandler.  If the sweep goes beyond what several of us are expecting, then O'Brien could well win.  Keep in mind that he won the Republican caucus in 2010 only because 298 Republicans had been elected that November.  Had the number been in the 250-280 range, there's no doubt in my mind that Chandler would have prevailed.  Even with the 298, O'Brien won by less than ten votes on a second ballot.

    Thus, the number one factor in predicting who the Speaker will be is guessing how many seats Republicans will control.  As I reported last week, I upped my number from 239 to 250 in the wake of the primary, and truth be told, it could go much higher; once these dominoes start to fall, there's no telling how many of them will topple.

    Thus, from that point of view, I'd give O'Brien a real shot.

    However, ultimately we get down to counting individuals, and as I reviewed primary results, I'd say the primary was much better for Chandler than for O'Brien who in fact can "thank" Greg Moore, his chief of staff when he was Speaker, for problems he faces today.  Remember that Moore, who is very popular with tea party elements of the party but truly despised by some of the old guard (no names please) parachuted out of his office with the Speaker to a cushy position with the Koch brothers and their Americans for Prosperity organization.

    Remember too that I reported the day before the primary how I had received two mailers from Moore and Company attacking Mark Proulx, an anti-right to work Republican running for the float in my district.  I also wondered how many other Republicans were similarly targeted, and I'm beginning to get an answer.  Three other Republicans have come forward to tell me they were so targeted.  In fact, one actually showed me the mailing which was exactly like the one I had received against Proulx.

    Guess what?  All four of these targeted Republicans won.  Proulx and two others even topped the ticket handily, and you can be sure, they'll never vote for O'Brien not matter how much he might try to distance himself from the slimy tactics of his former chief of staff.  I should probably name names since my guess is these Reps would not have told me unless they wanted it made public--okay, I'll name two of them, James Webb in Derry and James Devine of Sanborn.

    Don't get me wrong; Moore and the Koch Brothers had every right to target Republicans, but these Republicans also have every right to remember it when it comes to voting for Speaker.  I can only assume there were many more than the four who have become known to me.

    Thus, O'Brien's former chief of staff may well have fatally wounded him in the race for Speaker.

    However, it goes much deeper than that.  While O'Brien acolyte David Bates, of Windham, won his primary (finishing fourth out of four winners), O'Brien lost at least five supporters.  Both Garcia sisters are out in Salem, victims of their anti-gambling stance in a town that voted 80 percent for expanded gambling last winter.  Salem in fact was one of the few towns Marilinda lost in her Congressional race, and sister Bianca lost by one or two votes (after the recount).

    Not only was O'Brien supporter Tim Comerford beaten in the Fremont area, but he lost to an anti right to work candidate.  How do I know?   Because a labor leader (no names please) began talking to me at my own polling place on election day, relating how they were out to "get" Comerford; they did.   They also got O'Brien supporter Calvin Pratt in Goffstown.

    I warned you that we'd need to get into the weeds here, considering individuals, not just some nebulous group.

    Long time Chandler supporter David Welch, former respected Criminal Justice Chair, returned after being ousted by the far right in 2012.  So did Chandler supporter John Tholl in the north country.  Of course, we need to await general election results, but trust me here, I wouldn't be naming names unless I was relatively sure they would win in November.

    The only Chandler supporter who lost, according to my calculations, was John Graham, of Bedford, no surprise really since he championed the gas tax increase in the second most conservative town in the state (New Ipswich is number one in my rankings).  I would also rank Peter Silva, O'Brien supporter, a favorite in Nashua now that the party has added his name to the ballot, but on balance, my quick tally is that Chandler benefits by about a 15-5 margin as a result of the primary.

    I know those numbers are not large, but in a close race, every Republican counts.  No, I don't expect Democrats will be able to play games with this like they did in 2004 in electing Republican Doug Scamman over the now departed Mike Whalley.

    After wandering around at Saturday's Republican convention (after all, I couldn't stand the pablum coming from most of the speakers), I am convinced this race will be close indeed.  Many, many delegates were wearing O'Brien stickers. I didn't recognize most of the faces, so they may not all have been State Rep candidates and they may not win in November; that's precisely why I say the more Republicans elected, the better O'Brien's chances.

    However, after observing more than a few Sanborn (Laurie, of Bedford, husband of Senator Andy Sanborn) For Speaker stickers (including one on my own lapel, as I recall), I'm beginning to think that neither Chandler nor O'Brien will have a sufficient number of first ballot votes for victory (50 percent plus one is needed).

    That's my very long and convoluted answer to who the next speaker will be.
    Bottom line--I'd give Chandler an edge but not that big an edge.  Some Democrats are telling me that voters will turn out in droves to reject O'Brien. To that, I would respond, "Dream on."

    A truth in blogging caveat is in order.  Some people assume that I would be in Chandler's camp since I have supported him in the past and had a rather famous run-in with O'Brien.  You would be wrong to think that.  First, I would have to get elected (were I an analyst rather than a candidate, I would make me a favorite).
    While I like Chandler, I do not like (the word loathe would in fact apply) the people he would most likely choose as part of his leadership team.  Yes, I will name names--Shawn HV Jasper, David Hess, Sherm Packard, and Norm Major.  None of them can be trusted.  They all oppose three issues I hold close--retaining gay marriage; liberalizing our outmoded marijuana laws; and raising interstate speed limits (Packard has always fought again this...although he always admits to speeding himself, an especially loathsome confession).
    On the other hand, O'Brien is surrounded by some of my favorite Representatives including Dan and Carol McGuire and Pam Tucker. Whenever I start thinking about this choice, I remind myself that issues matter most, and I'm most likely closer to O'Brien than Chandler on issues.  If I'm elected, I'll pledge first  ballot support for Laurie Sanborn and see where we go from there.

    Whew!  At last, I can get back to looking at U.S. Senate races.  You know Democrats are in trouble when the best news of the past week is that a judge in Kansas allowed their Senate candidate to get off the ballot to allow a flawed independent a free shot at Pat Roberts (although slightly down in the RCP averge, Roberts has pulled ahead in the two most recent polls and will hold on to the seat).

    But that's another story....



    The Polls--Republicans Up 10 In Enthusiasm

    Last week, I wrote that the Republican wave has not yet crested, but is still building.  Two new polls out today bear that out.

    NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Annenberg reports that Republicans enjoy a 54-44 advantage in identifying which party's voters are "highly interested in the coming election".  According to the pollster, even though Democrats hold a 46-42 lead in the generic ballot among all voters, Republicans ae up 51-43 in the generic ballot of the interested.

    Even worse news for Democrats, Gallup is out today showing that Republicans have pulled nearly even in favorability ratings.  Last fall, Democrats enjoyed a 43-28 advantage; today it's only 42-40, and among Independent voters, Republicans actually have a one point lead, 36-35.  The fact that Democrats are ahead at all is because while 88 percent of Democrats now view their party favorably, only 76 percent of Republicans views their party favorably.  Wow, that 24 percent of Republicans who have qualms about their party must have been at the New Hampshire GOP convention Saturday when the right wing hijacked the party resulting in a homophobic theocracy taking center stage. I'd like to say I'm only kidding, but instead I'll say, no wonder there is a gap within the GOP ranks of trusting their own party.

    By the way, I'd like to thank all those people who privately contacted me agreeing with the blog I posted about the convention.  As always, feel free to contact me privately at or post a comment at

    Someone asked me which kind of god (God) would deny basic rights, like the right to fall and love and marry, to all.  My response--perhaps the Islamic god. Thus, it was quite ironic that the same neanderthals in the New Hampshire Republican Party who would deny rights to gay citizens also were quick to condemn Sharia law.  Last time I checked, Sharia law is just about as anti-gay as the majority of NH Republicans (at least as expressed at that convention).

    But this is supposed to be a review of polls.  


    Normington What?--Most of you undoubtedly have never heard of a polling outfit called Normington, Petts, and Associates; I know I hadn't until this past weekend.  It's done a poll funded by the Demcratic group Americans for Responsible Solutions.  Thus, it's probably not to be trusted, but until Andy Smith and UNH are out with numbers (hopefully later this week), I'll at least report the numbers.  This group has Annie Kuster up six (44-38) over Marilinda Garcia and Carol Shea Porter up two (45-43) over Frank Guinta.  My guess is you can knock five points off the Democratic totals therein; thus let's say the Kuster-Garcia race is dead even, and Guinta is up a few over Shea Porter.  That's my hypothesis. Let's see if UNH numbers bear that out.  Note the Normington sample was prior to the New Hampshire primary.  Also note the relatively small sample.

    This information is from (Huffington Post). Real Clear Politics does not report partisan polling.  Pollster has Shea Porter up 43.6-42.9 in its average (which includes this poll) and Kuster up 41.4-35.6, numbers heavily skewed by this poll.  RCP is not revealing averages for Congress, but it has Governor Maggie Hassan up 14.4 points (50.6-36.2) over Republican challenger Walt Havenstein (guess who I'm voting for there).  

    Um, Jeannie, Really?--Actually I'm very fond of Scott Brown and can hardly wait for the new UNH numbers.  By the way, did anyone see Missouri native Jeanne Shaheen questioning Secretary of State John Kerry on CSpan?  It seemed like every other word out of her mouth was "um"; so much for Shaheen's claim to eloquence. 

    A Republican Senate?--Pollster has also gone from a slight edge for Democrats to hold the U.S. Senate to a 59 percent chance for Republicans to take over, quite a switch.  In fact, it's higher than Nate Silver at (54.8% chance for GOP).  Silver reports that the Daily Kos (very left wing) gives Republicans a 54 percent chance; the New York Times a 58 percent chance; and the Washington Post 62 a percent chance.  Only a group out of Princeton gives Democrats the edge, and it's such an outlier (93 %) that it's hardly worth considering.

    What did I say about the wave building, a fact that is somewhat alarming to this Republican after having seen the radical right take over the NH GOP last weekend.  It's almost time for this Republican to start rooting for Democrats (or would that kind of comment get me thrown out of the party by Her Majesty Jennifer the First?).

    Could Coakley Lose Again?--Rasmussen has Democrat Martha Coakley, loser to Scott Brown in the U.S. Senate race a few years back, dead even with Republican Charlie Baker 42-42.  The Boston Globe had similar numbers a few weeks back, leading to the question--can Coakley pull the double of losing twice statewide in this most Democratic of all states?


    2014 New Hampshire House: 1st District - Shea-Porter 45%, Guinta 43% (Normington, Petts & Associates 9/3-9/7)

    Population   400 Likely Voters
    Margin of Error   ±4.9 percentage points
    Polling Method   Live Phone
    Source Normington, Petts & Associates (D-Americans for Responsible Solutions PAC)
    This poll asked respondents 1 question tracked by HuffPost Pollster.

    1) 2014 New Hampshire House: 1st District

    Asked of 400 likely voters
    Frank Guinta (R) 43%
    Carol Shea-Porter (D) 45%

    2014 New Hampshire House: 2nd District - Kuster 44%, Garcia 38% (Normington, Petts & Associates 9/3-9/7)

    Population   400 Likely Voters
    Margin of Error   ±4.9 percentage points
    Polling Method   Live Phone
    Source Normington, Petts & Associates (D-Americans for Responsible Solutions PAC)
    This poll asked respondents 1 question tracked by HuffPost Pollster.

    1) 2014 New Hampshire House: 2nd District

    Asked of 400 likely voters
    Marilinda Garcia (R) 38%
    Ann McLane Kuster (D) 44%



    Here's the Gallup trend line.


    Recent Trend of Favorable Ratings of Major U.S. Political Parties

    Recent Trend of Favorability of Republican Party by Political Identification

    As would be expected given the stability in overall views of the Democratic Party, the ratings of it by respondents' political identity are also generally steady over the past 12 months. However, Democrats and independents are less positive toward the Democratic Party than they were in late 2012, after Obama's re-election.

    Recent Trend of Favorability of Democratic Party by Political Identification


    NH Republicans Push Freedom...Except For Gay People

    As expected, New Hampshire Republicans, at their state convention earlier today, rejected an attempt my Manchester Chair Tammy Simmons to make the party platform a tad more open and inclusive to gay people.

    The vote to remove the language declaring marriage only for "one man and one woman" was defeated 124-241 (34-66 percent).  However, what was not expected was that Republicans moved much further to the right, accepting extreme anti-gay language by a voice vote to an amendment offered by Walter Stapleton.

    Among other things, the omnibus amendment, straight out of the playbook of the 19th century Know Nothing Party, declared that marriage between one man and one woman is ordained by god and recognized by the state.

    The convention was so disappointing (a waste of five hours of my life) that I immediately felt the need to go home and take a shower in an attempt to wash off the filth (figurative, not literal of course).

    Republicans were quick to invoke god (God?) for their actions, making me wonder if I was at a political convention of a 21st century party or back in colonial days listening to Jonathan Edwards level fire and brimstone ("Sinners in the hands of an angry god"--that takes me back to 1968 American Lit with Miss Dickson).

    Simmons's eloquence was clearly wasted on these neanderthals as New Hampshire Republicans moved further out of step with main stream American thought.  All polls show Americans supporting marrige equality, in the +15-20 points, but New Hampshire Republicans clearly prefer to divine god's (God's) will rather than support equality for all.

    September 15--CBS/New York Times 56-37 % support gay marriage.

    August 7—Marist—54-38 % support for gay marriage.

    August 4—CBS—53-40 % support for gay marriage.

    June 1—ABC—56-38 % support for gay marriage.

    May 11—Gallup—55-42 % support for gay marriage.

    March 10—Bloomberg—55-36 % support for gay marriage.

    February 26—Pew—54-39 % support for gay marriage.

    "We believe in freedom for everyone," former (and perhaps future) Rep. Simmons declared, but clearly Republicans believe in freedom for everyone except their gay brothers and sisters.

    It was truly ironic because the second clause of the party's statement of principles reads, "We, the people of the New Hampshire Republican Party, do stand united in our dedication to preserving freedom, limited government and opportunity for all."


    Freedom for all, indeed!

    Limited government, indeed!

    Opportunity for all, indeed!

    When New Hampshire passed marriage equality three session ago, only about a dozen Republicans voted for it (yes, of course I was one of them).  Most of those Republicans are gone today, so one is left wondering whether we would get more than a handful of Republicans to support marriage equality were the issue to surface today.

    If my projections of a huge Republican marjority are correct and if Republicans are true to the troglydiitic platform language, we should certain expect yet another effort to repeal gay marriage.  It's not likely to succeed; after all, even when Republicans had 298 of 400 Reps in the O'Brien years, the gay marriage repeal failed, but today's action clearly showed that two out of three Republicans believe in turning the clock back; in hoping to force gay people back into the closet.

    I'll repeat; after escaping from the convention, I felt the need to take a shower to wash off the filth from my own party.
    Not only did Republicans attempt to turn back the clock on gay marriage, they also passed, again on a voice vote, an amendment offered by Rep. Dan McGuire which would have us repeal the Blaine Amendment which forbids tax money being used for religious schools.  McGuire said this would make school voucher bills constitutional, but of course, he neglected to acknowledge that there's another section of our Constitution which strictly prohibits tax monies being used for religious institutions.  Rep. McGuire may have succeeded in fooling the vast majority of Republicans gathered today, but he didn't fool me for a minute, and let that record indicate that as a State Representative, he's had opportunities to repeal the Blaine amendment and never once has tried.

    I suppose that should this gang of Republicans get elected (as I fully expect they will), we can fully expect to revisit not only gay marriage but 19th century amendments.

    So much filth, so little time to wash it all away.

    Needless to say, I was about as disappointed as one could ever be in his own party, but then I would be equally sad to be in the Democratic Party which seems more and more determined to tax and spend us into oblivion.

    By the way, while all polls show support by gay marriage in the plus 20 range, most polls continue to indicate Republican opposition, albeit not by quite the 64 percent number New Hampshire delegates showed us today.

    Sad, sad, sad, but congratulations to Rep. Simmons for trying.
    Another amendment which passed was one which, contrary to the platform committee which preferred a general statement of principles, singled out Sharia law for special approbation.  Who would have known that Republicans have become such religious scholars as to single out Sharia law for special condemnation.
    No wonder Americans are hated by such large segments of the Islamic world; a gratuitous slap from the NH GOP certainly will add to that.

    Those many Republicans who favor gambling will have to buck the party platform if they push for it next year.

    The party kept a plank noting, "Reject expanded casino and video lottery gambling as a means to balance the budget or increase spending."

    Of course, I suppose pro Republican gamblers could say they are doing it not for the money, but just for the fun of it all.


    Like much of the New Hampshire Republican platform, the plank makes no sense whatsoever!

    The convention was not without its comic, one would even say Kafkaesque moments, especially when District 18 State Senate candidate George Lambert insisted on challenging the ruling of Chair Jennifer Horn that amendments offered could not be divided.  The rules clearly stated that, so the challenge of the chair was pure folly, the type we've come to expect from Lambert.  A move to suspend the rules would have been more proper, but that would have required a two-thirds vote.  Some delegates nearly blew a vein in insisting that the a voice vote was insufficient to support the chair (clearly it was); they demand a count, and sure enough, Horn's ruling was affirmed 220-134, the only time I voted in the majority all day.

    As I said earlier this week, I'd never attended one of these meaningless dog and pony shows before, and I never will again; my blood pressure can't take another one!

    All candidates addressed the gathering of right wingers as did former Hewlett Packard CEO and defeated California Senate candidate Carly Fiorina.  When she mouthed the McCain/Graham/Ayotte dogma that we must defeat ISIS, I couldn't help thinking--how many dead Americans and how many billions of American dollars (money that we clearly don't have) to accomplish that utopian end.

    As I say, it was a sad, sad, sad, sad day for sanity in the state party and the body politic. 

    Somebody mentioned to me that this is not the Republican party of the much loved Ray Burton.  Let me close with the sad but true observation that Republicans like those at today's convention were responsible for Ray Burton and  good men like him being forced to remain in the closet their entire lives.  Only Democrats (and Independents) have helped burst open the closet doors, gott sei Dank.



    Counting Chickens?  Hardly!

    In response to the note that I had upped my prediction for Republican seats in the New Hampshire House from 239 to 250, someone responded on that I was counting chickens too soon, that any wave I foresee seems to be cresting too soon.  Here it is.
    Counting chickens?

    I'm skeptical. Seems to me that if there is some sort of wave, its cresting pretty early.
    I have three responses to that.

    One, anyone who knows me is aware that I meticulously attempt to separate what I want to happen from what I think will happen (predictions) and that my predictions tend to be conservative when noting a trend.

    Two, the tenor of the comment seems to be that I want Republicans to score major gains.  Again, anyone who knows me (a fiscal conservative but an equally social liberal--in other words, an ardent and true libertarian) should realize that a huge Republican majority is in fact the last thing in the world I desire.

    Super control by either party leads to the kind of mischief which scares me--note the attempt (albeit a failure) to repeal gay marriage the last time Republicans had a super majority; the passage of an unconstitutional school voucher bill (although the Supreme Court allowed it to stand, it was simply on the basis on "standing," not constitutionality); an overly broad stand your ground law; not to mention a redistricting plan clearly in violation of the one man, one vote principle (just ask the good people of Pelham if you don't believe me).

    I shudder to point out all the harm Democrats did when they had a super majority (and since Democrats tend to follow their leaders like lemmings--or chickens with their heads cut off--they really don't need a "super" majority).  As I recall, in the 2007-2010 sessions, Democrats passed more than a hundred tax and fee increases.  Ouch!

    To repeat, I for one do not desire a super Republican majority; in fact, I fear; total control by either party is a very bad thing; but once again, I separate what I think will happen from what I hope will happen.

    Three, as to the wave, it has most definitely not crested.  It is building, as waves tend to do, ever so slowly.  That's what should scare Democrats the most.  All polling data--and this is why I write so much about polls--bear out that the wave is building. Note how only Rasmussen has Democrats ahead in the generic ballot (see below).

    Here's an inside story.  Two days ago, during the legislative session, I spoke with a well respected and intelligent North Country Democratic Representative (no names please, but the adjective I've supplied should narrow the choice).  He (yes, it was a he) told me that he had quarreled recently with Democratic Chair Raymond Buckley who was trying to pooh pooh the problem Democrats face this year.  "At least, be honest Ray," the Democratic Rep told his highness.

    The words Ray Buckley and honesty should never be uttered in the same sentence!  

    There are no so blind as those who will not see!

    Nothing is worse than self deception, and either Chairman
    Buckley is either becoming the King of Self Deception or is simply attempting to deceive to his base.

    The wave has NOT crested.  Democrats could be in far more trouble than even I anticipate.  If that's true, Raybo and Company could awake the day after the election in a complete daze.  250 could be far too few Republican seats.  In fact, I've revealed here before that the numbers cruncher I respect most in the state (no names please) has privately told me he pegs the number at upwards of 270.

    If in fact the wave is just building, Democrats should be prepared for one or two major surprises on election day.  

    No, I'm not saying Havenstein is going to beat Maggie (he's far too bad a candidate for that), but be prepared to be surprised.

    No, I'm not saying that Scott Brown will beat Shaheen (a new UNH poll should be out next week), but I wouldn't be surprised, and while I'm keeping my U.S. Senate forecast at 52R, I wouldn't be surprised to see 55R (Iowa and Colorado are back in play, according the this week's rash of polls).

    No, I'm not saying that Donna Soucy will lose the District 18 Senate seat to George Lambert whom I often agree with but continue to loathe, but the scenario is no longer out of the realm of possibility.  (Memo to Republican Party Chair Jen Horn--rather than trying to unify Republicans in Wards 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and Litchfield, Lambert spent the days after his upset primary victory, bad mouthing me to my friends!  I kid you not.  Yes, I still have a few friends in the area; after all, I've been elected nine terms in a row and once again topped the primary field in ward 8.  Last weekend, I heard from friends how Lambert was going around calling me stupid...not stupid enough to vote for him...even if Jen tries to have me thrown out of the party for saying it.  Are you, like me, puzzled how Ms. Horn thinks she can nullify the will of primary voters?).

    In a wave election--and all polls indicate the wave continuing to build--good people lose and bad people win (certainly Lambert would fall into that second category; beware Senator Soucy).  I recall how sad I was when some very good Democrats lost in 2010 (including Liz Merry who had served with me on Local and Regulated Revenues and was among the best I ever I'd ever worked with).



    2014 Generic Congressional Vote

    Polling Data

    PollDateSampleRepublicans (R)Democrats (D)Spread
    RCP Average 9/2 - 9/15 -- 46.2 42.7 Republicans +3.5
    CBS News/NY Times 9/12 - 9/15 470 LV 49 42 Republicans +7
    Rasmussen Reports 9/8 - 9/14 3500 LV 38 41 Democrats +3
    FOX News 9/7 - 9/9 833 LV 47 40 Republicans +7
    CNN/Opinion Research 9/5 - 9/7 LV 49 45 Republicans +4
    ABC News/Wash Post 9/4 - 9/7 LV 47 44 Republicans +3
    Pew Research 9/2 - 9/9 1150 LV 47 44 Republicans +3

    All 2014 Generic Congressional Vote Polling Data

    Page 1 ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... 382 Next 5 Entries »