Mistake In ’08

The selection of Barack Obama is an historical mistake which will continue to unravel the Dimocratic Party for generations. Only now are honest Democrats beginning to assess the damage done. “Mistake In ’08” is the first installment in a multi-part series which will detail how big a mistake was self-inflicted by Democrats in 2008.

Item 10. We referenced Item 10 in The World Series: The Hillary Clinton Coalition Versus The Barack Obama Coalition, Part III Item 10 belonged to a list of consequences resulting from the recent November 2009 elections and the evidence mounting that the rejected Hillary/FDR coalition is a winning coalition while the Obama situation comedy coalition leads to electoral disaster. Here is what we wrote about Item 10:

10. The Dimocratic 10-year plan is dead. We’ll discuss this one soon (maybe tomorrow). It’s a six letter word.

What was that 10-year plan?

The six letter word is “census”. “The Census is the count of the US population conducted every ten years mandated by the Constitution. Redistricting is the process of drawing political borders to reflect changes in population.” Post-census redistricting was the Democratic 10 year plan which Obama has already effectively destroyed. 10 years of planning gone in a puff of smoke.

Briefly, after the disaster in 1994 when Democratic corruption and scandals and infighting resulted in a Republican triumph, Democrats realized they had a major problem. Not only had Democrats been hurt in national races, Democrats were severely beaten in state legislative races.

Republicans had taken advantage of their numeric power in the late 1980s and early 1990s to redistrict congressional lines to their advantage. After the 2000 elections Republicans did it again. Republicans redrew congressional district lines to benefit themselves. Democrats vowed to prepare for the 2010 census. “Census” and the redistricting which subsequently occurs became a Democratic mania.

Democrats created a 10-year plan to do to the Republicans via redistricting what the Republicans had done to Democrats with redistricted lines.

We’ll let Matt Compton of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee explain (from a presentation at Nutroots Nation):



Compton quoted to the Nutroots Obama-lover Nate Silver’s prediction that Dimocrats will lose 20-50 House seats in 2010. Compton faced with dread the increasing possibility that Dimocrats will be wiped out again in state legislatures. Even more dreadful is the fact that it is “red” states which are growing in population which means it is in those growing “red” states, where Republicans rule, wherein redistricting will most determine the composition of the national Congress. It wasn’t supposed to be this way.

* * * * *

It wasn’t supposed to be this way. For ten years Democrats plotted and worked.

First, after the 2000 debacle and the lead role of Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris, Democrats knew the state secretary of state office was important at the national level. In 2004, rulings by Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell undermined John Kerry and made the imperative to influence the state elections, which chose these important elected officials, even more of a priority.

More importantly, in electoral vote rich states like Ohio, the Secretary of State is also an important member of the apportionment board which draws the lines in the post-census redistricting. Steps had to be implemented to speed up implementation of the 10 year plan. The Soros funded Secretary of State Project aimed at shoring up the Dimocratic weakness. It was not just the role of State Secretaries of State in elections that was the problem – it was the census – it was redistricting.

Victories in the 2006 elections were meant to be the first step in the long road to post-census redistricting. First, a takeover of the congress in 2006. Next, an “expansion” of the majorities in 2008.

By 2010, the “hardening” of the gains would occur. In 2010, the glorious never-ending new age would begin – Democratic majorities would become permanent and “harden” and expand into areas and regions of the country never before friendly to Democrats. Eventually demographics, in the form of a minority majority country, would kick-in and the Democratic Party would rule for a thousand years. But it did not work out that way.

Now, Dimocrats who plotted for so long to win the post-census redistricting battle find themselves about to go up in a poof of Obama smoke.

It’s not only the anemic Obama poll numbers that worry. Already with less than 12 months in office Obama in some polls is below 50% approval. Unemployment, along with wasteful, spend, spend, spend policies and economic scams which only stimulate fraud, will likely drag Obama down even more next year.

Even Obama lovers begin to understand our critique of Obama as a cult of personality which will not help Dimocrats, but rather destroy the party. Matt Bai, Obama-lover:

MATT BAI WRITES IN SUNDAY’S NEW YORK TIMES MAGAZINE that President Obama has some selling to do if he’s going to be more than “a self-contained personality”: “Public support for each of Obama’s signature initiatives, including health care, remains lower than support for the president himself. In other words, without a sustained sales pitch to the voters, Obama has yet to convert his personal good will with the electorate into corresponding enthusiasm for his agenda. And as anxious congressmen study poll numbers and look toward their own re-election campaigns next year, that’s bound to become a more pressing problem for the White House. Lawmakers may yet be persuaded to enact the president’s ambitious agenda, coattails or not, but only if he gives them something else to which they can cling.”

The Obama cult of personality is a dying business. Even the object of the cult is no longer popular. For Dimocrats up for reelection in 2010 the cult of personality is a dying business:

Voters will choose 37 governors. Many Republicans view winning these races as the best way to rebuild the party because those elected to statehouses in 2010 will redraw congressional and legislative districts for the next decade.

Democrats have a 26-24 majority of governor’s posts, now that they lost Virginia and New Jersey to Republicans.

Both Republicans and Democrats expect the GOP will pick up Democratic-held seats in at least two states McCain won last fall. They are Tennessee, where Democratic Gov. Phil Bredesen is retiring with no obvious successor, and Kansas, where Democratic Gov. Mark Parkinson is stepping down and Sen. Sam Brownback is the GOP candidate.

Elsewhere, Republicans are looking to overtake Democratic governors in Colorado, Iowa, Massachusetts and Ohio. Incumbents in New York and Illinois are on the radar. The GOP has on its high-priority list open Democratic-held seats in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Attention is also on Oklahoma, Oregon, Maine and New Mexico.

In Iowa, the Republicans should be happy as polls show the incumbent is at an all time low.

In Ohio the results are just as sobering for the Dimocrats as Republicans gain strength.

Nationwide, independents flee from Obama Dimocrats.

Ten years of plotting, planning, and preparing – undone – by a boob.

Share