@Douglas

While I can't comment on 2016, in 2014 Republicans can win both Houses just on states and districts Romney won.  It doesn't necessarily matter too much for 2014 if Obama brought about some permanent New Democratic Majority, because it will be fought largely in areas that doesn't apply.  Any Democratic wins there will be based on popular Democratic candidates of toxic Republican ones, not the underlying Obama coalition.  

As far as the political implications - I want it to have effects, but I think they'll be fairly small unless Obama himself is implicated.  I do think it might help turnout on the right, and the IRS scandal might become a huge issue if it gets tied in with an Obamacare implementation train wreck.  I'm encouraged by Davis' view, but electorally pessimistic after 2012.  It might actually help some Democrats if they manage to get in the front of this.

@DocJay

My English teacher is wildly liberal.  She made us do a group project of creating artwork about some social issue.  My group chose the IRS scandal, which necessitated an explanation of what it actually was during the presentation.  After the usual questions about the artwork, she turned to me (I'm the political geek in the class) and said: "Now I have some questions about the issue", at which point she racked her brain to dredge up every liberal excuse for it - deluge of applications, Shulman was a Bush appointee, etc.  She basically pulled out everything possible that was not blatantly ludicrous to try to downplay it.  I was able to refute them all fairly easily (and quite enjoyed doing it), but I wonder how many share her view.

It's very possible to like the son but not the father.  Support for Rand Paul does not automatically make you one of Ron Paul's fanbots.

The quote feature does not seem to be working, but I'm with GayFreedomLover.  Cuccinelli is definitely electable, though probably not favored.  But Jackson, I suspect, will lose (though, as I said earlier, I think he can win, but that depends on a few things).  He has the potential to boost turnout among very conservative groups, but is probably very limited in his ability to expand beyond his base.  Jackson only got 6% of the vote in the primary against George Allen, which tends to indicate that he has a lot of work to do to win a victory based on turnout.  It's also worth noting that Virginians are fairly comfortable with split ticket voting.  The greatest problem for Cuccinelli is that Jackson's presence allows the Democrats to make the race more about social issues than he would like.

I definitely wouldn't say that position is now a sure bet for the Democrats.  The Republicans probably could have made things easier for themselves by choosing someone else, but to write this guy off seems premature.

Generally, this is probably a good idea.  However, there are a few things to keep in mind:

So far as I can tell, Rothenberg's analysis checks out factually with what Harper put out in its press release.

Harper is a Republican - affiliated polling firm.

The poll, again, was conducted for a group backing a draft Palin campaign, so it's not intended to show her weakness - if anything the opposite.

I totally agree.

Yes.  Should have made that clearer.  Sorry.

They included her in the poll because it was commissioned by a group supporting her.  My interest was piqued by the poor showing for someone of her stature, and what the implications of that might be.  I did not intend this to turn into a commentary on Palin's merits.

A fairly minor annoyance that Byron Horatio mentioned and that I happen to share.  As I've said, she's done a lot of good in helping conservatives win primaries.  It is, as the President would say, a sideshow.

I'll admit I'm don't really like her that much (there are far better on the Republican side), but my main point here was to comment on what I see as a notable trend of declining popularity for her.  She has done a lot of good - like helping out Cruz and Haley.

Oh, I agree.  I watched a lot of Fox News in the run-up to the 2010 midterms, and to this day I have a very annoying image in my head of her saying something along the lines of: "This administration has defied the will of the American people, and the American people are not happy" (I should note that she definitely had some better performances during her time at Fox;  this is just the one that sticks with me).  Whenever I think of it, I have an urge to go smack my head against a wall.

I admit I generally don't listen to the radio for this very reason, so I'm basically flying blind here, but I figure the bands I like - The Pogues, The Dubliners, The Irish Rovers, etc. - really could stand to be played a bit more.

Let me chime my thanks in as well.

I disagree about Newt; what's been getting him into a lot of the trouble he's been in over the years is his refusal to stick to boilerplate stuff.

As for guests, you guys should have gotten Steve Hayes.

Julian Bond has, but I think there ar some things even it can't trump.

Oops.