If Only Geo. Allen Had IM'ed a Male Page, He Could Really Relax Right About Now

Pollster John Zogby reports that Sen. George Allen (R-Va.)--a fella who has nothing but bad press for the past month or so--is now leading Democratic challenger James Webb 48 percent to 37 percent, with 17 percent undecided. The Zogster has been following 10 tightly contested races and his website reports that "Allen is the only Republican in the 10 Senate races featured in the Reuters/Zogby poll to hold a double-digit lead."

Elsewhere in battles for the World's Least Distinguished Greatest Deliberative Body, Zogby finds that the Missouri and Tennessee races are too close to call and that Dems are in the driver's seat in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland, Montana, and Rhode Island. Three of those wins, if they happen, would be pick-ups for the Dems. Zogby doesn't predict the Dems will take control over the Senate, contenting himself instead by spinning out one of the shittiest metaphors I've seen used recently in discussing politics:

There are way too many undecideds in these races, compared to a typical congressional election year. But given the political landscape, Democrats ought to be driving a truck through these roads of opportunity, but that's not the case just yet. The question is, will the Democrats reach the finish line in victory or will their truck run out of gas?

Hmm…what kind of truck? The sort that Timothy McVeigh drove? Or the original World Trade Center bombers? A good old-fashioned Amurican-made gas guzzler, now that gasoline is no longer $10 a gallon? Or a light pickup, symbolizing wiser use of resources? And what if the Dems reach the finish line in defeat? All tough questions.

More Zogby on Senate here.

When it comes to the House, Zogby says that Dems hold advantages in 11 of 15 races he's tracking (these are seats held by Republican incumbents). Ever the coy pollster, Zogby again refuses to predict but can't restrain himself from another shitty figure of speech, this one invoking Queen Elizabeth II (the one great beneficiary of the Sex Pistols' ire all those years ago):

In other races I am following closely, there are reasons to see Democrats ahead in other Republican districts, as well. No predictions yet because there are still many undecided voters, but Republicans can breathe a sigh of relief that the election was not held the past few days. These polls were taken during what Queen Elizabeth would describe as 'weekendus horribilis' for the Republicans.

More here.

Comments

[JT Barrie]

If there were clear differences established between the two parties NOT based on how to divvy up the spoils, the races would be much different. As long as Democrats refuse to separate themselves and cling to the media designated center, the GOP - despite several transparent moral failings - will always be competitive.

[Mr. Nice Guy]

Mocking a tortured analogy is bad sport. Bad sport.

It's like a cat shaving a chipmunk and using it as a hacky-sack.

[Nicholas Sarwark]

In other races I am following closely, there are reasons to see Democrats ahead in other Republican districts, as well. No predictions yet because there are still many undecided voters, but Republicans can breathe a sigh of relief that the election was not held the past few days. These polls were taken during what Queen Elizabeth would describe as 'weekendus horribilis' for the Republicans.

I never knew that the Queen had a penchant for goofy fake Latin. Learn something new every day. Thanks, Zogby.

[Pro Libertate]

As a good libertarian, I'm hoping for the return of divided government. However, what are the consequences if the Democrats blow this election? I mean, the opportunity should be pretty good to displace some Republicans right now and failing to do so would not bode well. Would such a failure force the Democrats to moderate some of their views al? Clinton? Or will the more extreme elements take greater control?

I'd prefer the Congress get split in 2006. I see no real benefit to the GOP continuing to enjoy big government, and a nice black eye might help restore the respectability of the small(er) government conservative within the GOP. Not that I expect anyone to welcome the out-and-out libertarians with open arms. They want to ruin the fun, after all.

[Brian24]

Pro Libertate,

Neither. As with the 2004 election, the Democratic moderates will argue that the far left lost the election by scaring the voters, and the far left will argue the moderates lost it by not offering a clear alternative. Irrelevant blood will be shed and little will change.

[Disgruntled]

Wasn't it just two years ago when everyone predicted a Democrat Reconquest? All the polls predicted it. Then it didn't happen, and the pundits scratched their heads and looked silly. For about a week. Then they predicted how Nancy Pelosi's career was over. She was finished. She failed.

Fast forward to 2006. Nancy Pelosi's ass is being measured for the Speaker's chair. The Republicans will lose control of Congress. Unless they don't. The pundits will be wrong. Or right. It won't matter, because by then they will have switched gears and gunned the engines for the 2008 election. The one that is still two years in the future. It will never end. And everything the lawmakers do from now to eternity will be based on how it bodes for "the next" election.

[Bubba Zanetti]

If Mehlman/Rove are committed enough to street fight like Carville did in Clinton's second term, they would seize upon the recent Drudge revelation that the famous IMs were with an 18 year old, i.e., consenting adults...

[BakedPenguin]

Disgruntled - so are you in favor of term limits for pundits?

[Mr. Nice Guy]

Dis:

Ugh. The thought of that shrill harpy being the Speaker of the House is profoundly depressing. It would make us miss that "I zee NOTHING! I hear NOTHING!" former wrestling coach.

[madpad]

Washington Stock Exchange's bet that the GOP will retain the house is up almost $20 from last week.

Obviously these guys don't see a change coming.

I gotta disagree with JT Barrie about the dems problem being sticking to the middle. The problem for dems isn't position. It's style.

Style-wise they're weiners who've let the Conservatives define them. They won't be aggressive about anything. They're content to sit on the sidelines and watch the Republicans duke it out and hope to reap the benefits.

But they're forgetting 200 men letting a clueless woman like Pelosi and an idiot like Reid do all the heavy lifting WAY doesn't look good to anyone.

It may be ugly watching Republicans fight and fall over each other, but at least they're fighting something which is more than anyone can say about democrats.

[Nancy Pelosi]

I am NOT clueless!
I am a mother and a grandmother!
Listen to me!

Anyone?

Hello?

[Tim Cavanaugh]

Wasn't it just two years ago when everyone predicted a Democrat Reconquest? All the polls predicted it.

They did?

This pundit wasn't predicting no Democratic Reconquest!

[joe]

I don't remember anything about a Democratic Reconquest in 2004. Link? Or something?

"If Mehlman/Rove are committed enough to street fight like Carville did in Clinton's second term, they would seize upon the recent Drudge revelation that the famous IMs were with an 18 year old, i.e., consenting adults..."

Oh, no! I certainly hope the Republicans don't keep the Molested Page/Coverup story going for another two weeks by arguing that, technically, the Congressman who resigned in disgrace didn't do anything illegal! That would just be awful for the Democrats, as GOP talking heads on cable news responded to accusations that they enable child molestation by running through a timeline that shows the dates of when certain acts occured and when the page's birthdays were. Boy, that's the kind of streetfighting that would really knock the Democrats out.

Pleae, Bubba, don't throw me in the briar patch.