As Bayh announced his retirement, he offered advice to his Democratic peers.

“My advice to my fellow Democrats is the only way we can actually govern in this country is make common cause with the independents and moderates,” the Indiana centrist said during an appearance on MSNBC. “Sometimes half a loaf is better than none.”

Some pundits believe that the move allows Bayh to concentrate on building his bonafides for an eventual run for President.  But, others opin that his retirement was a way to preserve his power and image by not being beat by a former Senator during a year that Republicans retake seats across the nation.  Either way, losing solid party members is never good news to a party struggling to convince Americans that the Democrats are acting in their best interest.  This is going to be a long year for Dems at all levels.

New data out indicates that voters are beginning to sour on Obama as the generic Republican candidate is in a statistical tie with the President on a generic ballot.

The problem is not an issue with the Democratic base (although many of the wave voters will not turn out again), but Independents are sorry that the change they voted for was not necessarily the change they wanted:

Most Democratic voters and Republican voters plan to support their own party’s candidate for president in the 2012 election. Independents currently show a greater preference for the Republican candidate than for Obama, by 45% to 31%, though about one in four do not have an opinion.

Losing Independents by this margin during mid-terms is an indication of impeding losses by Democrats - especially the Republican-leaning seat they’ve picked up over the past two election cycles.

Will Republicans win enough seats to win back the house?  I’m not sure yet, but we will certainly win enough to make a stand on the rest of Obama’s legislation.  Regardless, Obama’s political strength is eroding.  Not just in this survey, but he was unable to motivate “wave” voters to turn out in Massachusetts, New Jersey and Virginia.

This is going to be a tough cycle for Democrats.

Nearly 15.3 million people are still out of work in the U.S. despite hundreds of billions of dollars spent by the Democratic government to “restart” the economy.

From Politico:

The nation’s unemployment rate held steady at 10 percent in December, presenting a continuing political difficulty for President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats heading into the 2010 midterm elections.

The work force lost an additional 85,000 jobs in December, government figures released Friday showed — a hit to the national economy, but not as bad as during several months at the height of the financial collapse last year.

This has stark, negative political implications for a party that has enjoyed two cycles of successes.  Now, you would be hard-pressed to find a pundit on either side that believes that the Democrats will lose less than a dozen races in the mid-term election.

An interesting strategy deployed by the DCCC (Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee), the organization charged with protecting Democratic Congressional seats, tries to revive the “party of no” attack on Republican incumbents using radio ads and robocalls.  The Democrats are clearly scrambling to develop a strategy that will turn-back public anger.

Text from Robocall against Florida Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart (R):

Remember? We said it can’t happen again. But did you know Congressman [Mario] Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.) voted to let Wall Street continue the same risky practices that crippled retirement accounts and cost taxpayers $700 billion, including unchecked bonuses and salaries for executives. Maybe the $81,204 he got from financial special interests mattered more than taxpayers.

According to the Politico - “A spokesman for the DCCC, Ryan Rudominer, said his committee’s message is not so much about Republican inertia as about the GOP siding with the very banks and financial institutions that many Americans blame for tanking the economy last fall.”

But, the article also highlights brutally honest thoughts from a top Democratic pollster:

“People are angry and what Democrats are trying to do is channel that anger,� said Democratic pollster Doug Schoen. “You’ve got to displace the anger onto the Republicans. If they can do that, Democrats have some hope but right now things are looking increasingly bleak every day.�

Schoen was blunt about the challenge Democrats are facing next fall. “The Democrats are trying to stem the bleeding,� the former pollster for President Bill Clinton said. “Obama’s in a free fall and, unless they stem the bleeding, they’re going to face unprecedented losses.�

Wow - harsh words from a Democratic pollster that confirms what we have been seeing nationwide.  Even in deep-blue districts, voters are angry at Democrats and I doubt that this attack will move the needle.  Take this data from a survey we conducted in November for Republican Congressional candidate Bill Hudak who is running against a seven-term Democrat in the very blue state of Massachusetts:

· In the 6^th congressional district, which Barack Obama won 58% to 41% in 2008, a generic Democrat leads a generic Republican today by only 5 points, 43% to 38%.

· While voters approve of Barack Obama’s performance 57% to 40%, they disapprove of Congress 59% to 35%. 57% of voters have an unfavorable view of Nancy Pelosi, while 37% view her favorably.

· A plurality (49%) of voters oppose the healthcare reform legislation currently being debated in congress, while 45% support it. 68% of voters say they are very concerned about the growing national debt.

· Congressman Tierney’s “hard reelect� is at only 32%, lower than would be expected for a seven-term incumbent in a heavily Democratic district.

· Despite being nearly totally unknown at this stage of the campaign, Republican Bill Hudak earns 31% against Congressman John Tierney in a test ballot. Tierney wins 53%. Tierney won reelection in 2008 with more than 70% of the vote; the current political environment has narrowed the playing field.

Clearly, Republicans are gaining ground on Democrats in all districts.  The bottom-line is that voters are pissed-off and ready for change.  Of course, this anti-incumbent effect is not isolated to Democrats.  But, the Democrats are catching the majority of the blame since they control both Congress and the White House.

An interesting analysis of a statement by Nancy Pelosi over at the Think for Yourself…

Democrats are playing a dangerous game in an attempt to fully fund their health care proposal.  One of the ideas includes cutting Medicare benefits to help offset the new health care program costs.

From the Politico:

The top Senate Republican says Democratic cuts to Medicare will cost them in the 2010 elections, warning that the hundreds of billions in reductions to the senior citizen health program is “Orwellian.”

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), the Senate minority leader, criticized Democrats for insisting that a half-trillion dollars in cuts to Medicare as part of the health care overhaul, well, aren’t exactly cuts to Medicare.

“They’re taking a half trillion dollars out of Medicare not to make it more sustainable, but to start a new federal program for a whole new set of citizens. This is a huge issue,â€� McConnell said.

Then came McConnell’s warning.

“They ought not to do it, but if they do do it, it’ll be the biggest issue in the 2010 elections,â€� he said.

McConnell is right.  Democrats are not thinking about their future, or the impact to those depending on Medicare.

Our recently released research on how voters view health care indicates that seniors are already opposed to Obama’s health care proposal:

18-34: 28% support - 57% oppose
35-44: 44% support - 46% oppose
45-54: 46% support - 44% oppose
55-64: 44% support - 48% oppose
65+:    37% support - 52% oppose

As you can see, the oldest voters are among the most unfavorable of the plan.  I’m sure that Democrats may reconsider their plan to cut Medicare as we get closer to 2010 as they realize that voters 55 and older represent nearly 45% of the likely voter population.  It’s generally best not to make these people mad.

According to a recently released survey, 38% of Americans oppose Obama’s move to stop the missile shield. Just 32% agree with the move, while the balance isn’t sure.

Unsurprisingly, strength of opposition falls along party lines:
GOP - 58% oppose
DEM - 15% oppose
IND - 43% oppose

Republicans and Indepedents view this issue similarly.  This is bad news for Democrats who are looking at massive losses in the 2010 election, as voters maintain a significant anger regarding the failure of the stimulus and the ever growing national debt.  It is feasible for national security to become a strong secondary issue in the 2010 cycle.  Just how strong will depend on the earned media coverage regarding the program scuttle.

The Liberals may disagree, but the townhall protests work…

A new analysis out shows that the South is still a hotbed of conservatives.  Notice that some swing states, like Florida and Virginia, are less conservative than their Southern brothers.  But, being more or less conservative is not necessarily an indication that a Democratic Presidential candidate can or can’t win there.  Look at Indiana and Ohio.  Obama won both in 2008, despite being the most conservative states in it’s region.  Even more conservative than Florida and Virginia.  Two other states that went for Obama.

WRS client Peter Schiff, who is considering a run against Chris Dodd in Connecticut for U.S. Senate, rolls out a new website with the revelation that he has raised nearly half-a-million in less than three weeks despite being a political neophyte.

Here is an article highlighting Schiff’s haul.