It's beginning to look a lot like a deleted scene from Downfall

I'm talking about Joe Miller's campaign for US Senate, of course. The latest:

The editor of the Alaska Dispatch website was arrested [sic] by U.S. Senate candidate Joe Miller's private security guards Sunday as the editor attempted to interview Miller at the end of a public event in an Anchorage school. ... the owner of the Drop Zone, the private security firm that's been providing Miller's security, accused Hopfinger of trespassing at the public event, a town hall sponsored by the Miller campaign.

As you can see, Anchorage Daily News journo Richard Mauer bobbled the lede there.

"Arrested" implies an at least nominally lawful detention of someone, usually by police, on suspicion of having committed an actual crime.

When one is grabbed and handcuffed to a chair by a couple of goons who ended up working "private security" because they couldn't get into the military or police force even under the "relaxed" standards of the post-9/11 era, for asking inconvenient questions of a political candidate at a public event on public property, one hasn't been "arrested," one has been "assaulted and abducted."

Is Joe Miller getting nervous yet?

He wants to be the next US Senator from the state of Alaska, but he also wants his prospective constituents kept in the dark about his previous history as a government employee.

Matter of fact, he's lawyering up to keep their prying eyes off his record as attorney for Fairbanks North Star Borough. Why am I not surprised to see that Sarah Palin's "threaten to sue anyone who doesn't just unquestioningly reprint our spin" guy got the gig?

Miller has to know that continuously acting like he has something to hide will cost him votes. Apparently he's betting that it will cost him fewer votes than coming clean would.

And I'm still betting that either approach will cost him more votes than he can afford to lose.

I'd like to feel sorry for the Tea Partiers, but I just can't. A movement that adopts Palin as its mascot, falls for the Scott Brown scam in Massachusetts, and even invites Wayne Allyn Root to speak at its events is effectively hanging a big "GULLIBLE -- CON ME!" signboard around its own neck. I'd have been surprised if the charlatans hadn't swarmed.

-----
memeorandum thread

Penetrating Political Insight of the Day

In my Senate predictions post, I called the Delaware election for Democrat Chris Coons and said that Christine O'Donnell isn't going to win.

Christine O'Donnell, Delaware Republican U.S. Senate nominee, smiles during remarks to the Family Research Council's Values Voters Summit in Washington, September 17, 2010. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst (UNITED STATES - Tags: POLITICS)

Christine O'Donnell, Delaware Republican U.S. Senate nominee, smiles during remarks to the Family Research Council's Values Voters Summit in Washington, September 17, 2010. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst (UNITED STATES - Tags: POLITICS)

One obvious reason for that prediction is the polling: O'Donnell trails Coons by double digits.

There's more to it than that, though.

As a commenter over at Libertarian [sic] Republican notes, "Scott Brown was polling 11 points behind [Martha] Croakley [sic] less than two weeks before the [Massachusetts January special] election."

True. But are the situations similar?

So far as I can tell, Scott Brown has never lost an election. He started off as a local property assessor, served three terms in the lower house of Massachusetts's legislature, won a special election to fill an unexpired term in the State Senate, and was subsequently re-elected to three full terms before running for US Senate.

O'Donnell, on the other hand, has never been elected to public office. This is her third run for US Senate -- she ran once before as the GOP nominee, and another time as a write-in after losing the GOP primary.

I don't care one way or another who wins that election. I don't live in Delaware, I'm not a voter, and even if I did live in Delaware and even if I did vote, I wouldn't vote for a Republican or a Democrat. But res ipsa loquitur, people: When you've lost this same election twice before, when you're down double digits in the polls, and when you're still stuck trying to convince your state's voters that you're not a witch a month before the election, the smart money just ain't on you.

November Senate Predictions

About a month out seems like the best time to make predictions -- far enough in advance that if I'm right I'm a prognosticator, not just someone who watched the exit polls. Of course, I'm also a lot more likely to be wrong, but hey, that's how it works.

General prediction: The Republicans will pick up three four^* US Senate seats. That gets them to 44 45^*, which will make it easier to block cloture on bills -- less need to whip "moderate" Republicans into line or shill for "Blue Dog" defections.

This is actually a good outcome for the Republicans. Even if they were to gain a majority in both houses of Congress, they still wouldn't be able to get anything done. Obama has a veto pen. But if they get a majority in even one house, Obama will be able to lay on the "Republican obstructionist" stuff more thickly and more credibly. Remember, Bill Clinton's numbers went up after the 1994 "Republican Revolution." Remaining in the minority now boosts Republican prospects in 2012, because they can spend the next two years forcing the Democrats to accept ownership of everything that comes (or doesn't come) out of DC.

Specific Predictions

Alaska: Lisa Murkowski will become the second American, after Strom Thurmond, to be elected to the US Senate by write-in vote.

Arkansas: Not even getting caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy can stop Republican John Boozman from unseating incumbent Democratic Senator Blanche Lincoln.

California: Incumbent Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer will be re-elected. Not by a huge margin, probably, but she'll pull it out. It's not so much that Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown has coattails for her as it is that his Republican opponent, "NutMeg" Whitman, has negative coattails for GOP Senate nominee Carly Fiorina.

Colorado: This state will be a GOP pickup as Ken Buck unseats incumbent Democratic Senator Michael Bennet.

Connecticut: Democrat Richard Blumenthal bests Republican Linda McMahon for the state's open (due to Christopher Dodd's retirement) US Senate seat. As with California, this won't be a blowout. It may even be a nail-biter (Blumenthal's lead has been shrinking for some time). But it's just not going to happen for the GOP there.

Delaware: Sorry, guys, Christine O'Donnell isn't going to win. Chris Coons holds Vice President Joe Biden's former US Senate seat for the Democrats.

Florida: A few months ago, I'd have picked Republican governor Charlie Crist to win this US Senate race as an independent. I was wrong on that. Republican Marco Rubio has it pretty much in the bag.

Illinois: The polls show Democrat Alexi Giannoulias and Republican Mark Kirk in a tight race for the US Senate seat formerly held by President Barack Obama and currently filled by Roland Burris. Don't believe the polls. There's no way the Democrats are giving up this seat, even if the dead have to rise and go to the polls to help them keep it.

Indiana: Another Republican pickup, with Dan Coats beating Brad Ellsworth to replace the retiring Evan Bayh.

Missouri: Republicans will hold on to the seat being vacated by retiring Kit Bond. As disgusting as the GOP nominee, US Representative Roy Blunt, may be (however tall he is, I didn't know they stacked shit that high), I can't really blame Missourians. The Democrats managed to find and nominate Secretary of State Robin Carnahan, one of probably only three politicians in Missouri less popular than Blunt (of the other two, Claire McCaskill was busy being a Senator already and former Governor Matt Blunt didn't run against Dad).

Nevada: Incumbent Democratic Senator Harry Reid will beat Republican nominee Sharron Angle like a drum.

Washington: Incumbent Democratic Senator Patty Murray will beat GOP nominee Dino Rossi.

I think the only even nominally competitive race I'm leaving out there is DioGuardio v. Gillibrand in New York. It doesn't look that competitive, and I'm betting it's even less competitive than it looks -- Gillibrand in a walk.

So, like I said, three four^* Republican pickups in the Senate.

-----
Update, October 8th: FOUR! FOUR GOP PICKUPS IN THE SENATE! I was just looking back over this post, and jumping Jeebus, I spaced an entire state, and an important one -- Wisconsin. Big brain fart, and I have no excuse or explanation for it. If the current polls and the trend are right, and I think they are, incumbent Democratic Senator Russ Feingold will go down on November 2nd to be replaced by Republican challenger Ron Johnson.

Feingold's scalp is probably the most prominent one that will get mounted on the GOP's trophy wall this year. He's high on the Republicans' hit list (for good reasons, including "McCain/Feingold") and low on the Democratic Party's support list (for bad reasons such as the fact that he didn't stop talking about torture, civil liberties, etc. once his party took the White House and commenced Bush's third term). Them's the breaks.

Dammit ... foiled again

I was secretly rooting for JD Hayworth in today's Arizona primary for the Republican Party's US Senate nomination.

No, I'm not a Republican.

No, I don't live in Arizona.

No, I'm not even particularly enamored of electoral politics any more.

I just happen to think that the GOP accelerating through the S-curve on its course toward institutional suicide by sending the wildest big-government whack-job west of the Pecos back to DC would make great television for the next two years or so (I can't imagine the crazy SOB making it for the full six years without ending up in prison, or at least out of office and guesting on Jerry Springer), that's all.

Instead, GOP voters stuck with Old Reliable (read: Boring as watching paint dry) John McCain, by landslide numbers reflecting a collective IQ a full order of magnitude higher than I'd have predicted.

The Other McCain is as disappointed as I am but for very different reasons (I have to write his affection for Hayworth off to Moonie brainwashing during his tenure at the Washington Times or some other similarly malign influence). One thing we do agree on is that there's only candidate left worth voting for (if you must) in that race.

Coakley concedes

The Boston Globe reports that Democrat Martha Coakley has called her Republican opponent, Scott Brown, and congratulated him on his victory.

If the reported returns so far are accurate, it looks like Brown about 52%, Coakley about 47%. If that's true, then it's a pretty sad commentary on Massachusetts. Whodathunk that in the birthplace of the American Revolution, only 1 in 100 voters would support the only candidate who in any way stands for that Revolution's values?

Update on the oddsmaker angle: Tuesday morning, I swagged the outcome as Brown 49%, Coakley 46%, Kennedy 5%. The actual outcome seems to have been Brown 52.2%, Coakley 46.8%, Kennedy 1%.

Recent polls had Kennedy at the 5% I predicted. I should have guessed that "wasted vote syndrome" would bring that way down, but I was unduly optimistic in this case -- the "major party" candidates were just so godawful that I thought Kennedy's vote would stick because it had no other even nominally worthwhile candidate to go to.

I'd be interested to know where that 4% did go to. Rasmussen had Coakley as the second choice of Kennedy supporters by a 2-1 margin. If that is how the fallaway from Kennedy broke, then Brown was doing better, and Coakley worse, than I thought before they picked up their respective last-minute-poltroon votes.

Liberty for Massachusetts? Unlikely, but worth pursuing anyway

I'm taking a break -- just finished another 100 name/phone number matches for the Massachusetts Libertarian "Get Out The Vote" phone banks -- and I'd like to take a minute to formally endorse Joe Kennedy.

He's not one of "those" Kennedys, as he's gone out of his way to make clear (Democrat Martha Coakley's campaign has also been vocal in driving home that point, for obvious reasons).

This Kennedy is the pro-freedom candidate -- the only pro-freedom candidate -- in today's election to fill the US Senate seat vacated by Ted Kennedy's death.

Just to elaborate a bit on that point: If you're a Massachusetts voter and you vote for anyone but Joe Kennedy today, you're voting against freedom, baseball, apple pie, Mom and America.

Whether or not you're a Massachusettsian, if you're voting or working for or donating to or talking up any candidate except Joe Kennedy today, you're pissing on the graves of the Lexington and Concord Minutemen. You're spiking the cannon that Knox dragged down from Ticonderoga. You're making a mockery of the Boston Tea Party and you're dancing in the blood of Samuel Gray, James Caldwell, Crispus Attucks, Samuel Maverick and Patrick Carr.

Yes, it really is that simple.

Can Kennedy win? Well, yes -- if a plurality of Massachusetts voters decide to support him.

Is that likely to happen? Of course not. Libertarians haven't yet persuaded a plurality of Massachusetts voters that we represent their highest aspirations while the Republicans and Democrats represent nothing worthy of support.

Does it matter whether or not Kennedy wins? Yes, it does. Because he will not win, the Senate will remain 100% anti-freedom instead of becoming even a paltry 1% pro-freedom. Over the course of Ted Kennedy's unexpired term, it's likely that that one pro-freedom vote would have made a difference in any number of bills -- passing them, defeating them, or amending them to make them better.

Since he won't win, does it matter which of the two anti-freedom candidates wins? Not really.

There are differences between Brown and Coakley, and between their parties, but not differences substantial enough to merit supporting either one. Do you really care that much whether the creatures gnawing the flesh off your bones are coyotes or happen to be hyenas?

Voting for or otherwise supporting Joe Kennedy means never having to say you're sorry. It means knowing that you did the best you could do for Massachusetts and for America. That's something worth knowing about yourself even if 95% of the people around you couldn't, wouldn't, or didn't put down the Demopublican crack pipe.

Game Day in Taxachusetts

It's about 4am in Massachusetts right now. The polls open at 7am and close at 8pm (unless the rules have changed since November).

Prediction #1

Photo from fOTOGLIF

Scott Brown wins the election by 4-7%. Maybe more, but I think that's a reasonable projection.

All three candidates will be working their Get Out The Vote operations to the very last minute, but Brown and Kennedy have the advantage.

It's winter weather with snow and rain in the forecast. Democratic voters are already demoralized. Maybe they'll brave the cold and wind and sludge to vote, maybe they'll stay inside where it's nice and warm.

Brown voters are energized -- not for any particularly good reason, but hey, people in India get killed in senseless religious stampedes all the time, don't they?

Most Kennedy voters are ideological voters. They never expected their candidate to win. Although they're doing their best to make that happen, they'll vote come hell or high water to have their dissenting voices heard, to send their message, to register their preference in the face of the knowledge that that preference will not be realized ... this time.

Scientific Wild Ass Guess: Brown 49%, Coakley 46%, Kennedy 5%.

But I could be very wrong.

Prediction #2

There will be controversy.

Libertarian Party Reptile

I'll be schlepping out to Riverport, a/k/a Verizon Wireless Amphitheater, tomorrow to staff a Libertarian Party outreach table with Julie Stone for the Vans Warped Tour stop in St. Louis. Thanks to Jeff Orrok of the Colorado LP, Austin Petersen at LPHQ, and Alexander McCobin of Students for Liberty for hooking the LP into this tour!



I also found out yesterday that I'll be serving on the Missouri LP's 2010 candidate recruitment committee. We haven't met yet, but I'll be pushing for us to aim high -- at least two primary candidates for each of the statewide offices and US House races, plus as many "down-ticket" candidates as possible. If you're a Missourian and interested in running for office, drop me a line and I'll tell you how fun and rewarding it can be (I've run five times in the last 12 years myself).

Speaking of candidates, check out (and support!) Rocky Frisco's campaign for city council in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Rocky's a long-time friend and truly one of the best guys on the planet.