August 11th, 2010
05:00 PM ET

Is this year's anti-incumbent fever for real?

[cnn-photo-caption image= http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/08/11/art.bennet.buck.2shot.cf1.gi.jpg caption ="In Colorado, Republican Ken Buck is challenging incumbent Sen. Michael Bennet."]

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

After months of taking a beating, the Democratic party finally got some much-needed good news in yesterday's primaries.

The biggest victory came in Colorado, where Michael Bennet, the candidate backed by President Obama and the party establishment, won handily. After backing several candidates who went on to lose this primary season, the president may have needed this win more than anyone.

Yet, as Politico reports, the best news for the Democrats may have actually come from the Republicans' results – with the GOP nominating candidates who are either vulnerable or plagued by gaffes and scandal.

Take for example, Ken Buck who will face off against Bennet in Colorado. He was backed by the Tea Party but opposed by much of the national GOP leadership. Running against a woman, he was caught on tape saying he should be elected because he doesn't wear high heels. Moron.

In Connecticut, Republicans nominated Linda McMahon for the senate race whose main claim to fame is a big bank account and a past association with professional wrestling.

In Minnesota, Republicans chose Tom Emmer, who is off to a rocky start after suggesting the minimum wage be altered to take tips into account.

And in Nevada, Harry Reid has actually pulled ahead in the polls after his Republican opponent has repeatedly shot herself in the foot by saying one stupid thing after another.

Yesterday's primaries also raise questions about whether the whole narrative of the 2010 elections is true. The anti-incumbent, angry electorate ready to dump insiders may not be the case after all.

While Congress' approval rating remains in the toilet – 19 percent according to Gallup's latest poll – the people who make up that Congress continue to be re-nominated.

Here’s my question to you: Is this year's anti-incumbent fever for real?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Brent in Cleveland, Ohio says:
I think the "anti-incumbent fever" is exaggerated. There's a small group of very noisy Tea Partiers who seem more numerous and important than they really are, but I think this will be a pretty typical midterm election. The party in power always loses seats, and this year will be no different, but it won't be a blow-out like some pundits predict.

Karl in San Francisco says:
No, Jack, everyone hates Congress as a group, to varying degrees, but most of us love our representatives individually and will re-elect them again and again. I live in San Francisco and will vote for Pelosi, Boxer and Feinstein. I'd vote out Boehner, Cantor, McConnell and Kyle, but that isn't my prerogative. I'm sure their constituencies love them and dislike my representatives.

Nancy in St. Louis says:
I believe it is true. The American people have had front row seats over the last several months on how the Congress and Senate operate. No one can come away feeling those leaders truly deserve to be there. More and more Americans are seeing the tactics that make one wonder who these leaders are working for – it certainly is not the American people. Bring in the personal indiscretions these people have gotten by with for years and I believe the majority of Americans do want the majority of the Congress and Senate replaced.

Dee in New Paris, Indiana says:
I think everyone is sort of anti-incumbent, no matter what the party of the incumbent. I think people are just sick of the politicians who make a career of running for office, thanking their supporters with favors, and then running for office again. I just do not think this is what our Founding Fathers had in mind.

Chaney in Louisiana says:
Not in Louisiana it aint. We will vote David (DC Madam) Vitter back in office. Some states are smarter than others, I guess.

Paul in Florida says:
This piece was written by a man working on getting Robert Gibbs' job. Good luck, Jack. You've got the slant down to an art form.

Filed under: 2010 Election
soundoff (112 Responses)
  1. william

    One notable politicians once said "all politics are local". That is as true now as it was then. Most voters hate the other guy, not theirs. If we were true to our convictions, we would throw out all the bumbs because there is a culture in Washington DC that is infectious. The only way to deal with an infection is with isolation and treatment. That means you cannot mix the infected with the uninfected and expect to have positive results. Throw out all of current members of congress and replace them 100%. Maybe we can then get back to governance and not political rangling all the time.
    Tulsa Oklahoma

    August 11, 2010 at 3:14 pm |
  2. andyz

    Jack, anti-incumbent fever has been real for decades. It started with the opposition to t he Viet Nam War and has continued to the present day. The exception was the Regan administration. With incumbents holding onto their offices for dear life, the only question is when will the voting public get fed up and vote all the incumbents out of office and start new. When our elected officials realize that their loyalty is to "we the people" and not to themselves the anti-incumbent/anti-government fever will dissipate.

    August 11, 2010 at 3:15 pm |
  3. Mike North Port, FL

    Anti-incumbent fever is for real. It's not anti-democrat or anti-republican. Congress is inept. Obama has promised transparency and yet things are continuosly being done behind closed doors. On top of that he seems to be continously on the wrong side of issues when you view the polls.

    Enough is enough! Throw all the bums out!

    August 11, 2010 at 3:18 pm |
  4. Sam

    Yeah you're right Jack, the anti-incumbent fever is just a hoax. The Democrats will get re-elected, keep the House and Senate, and along with the President's guiding hand will herald the apocalypse as an omnipotent progressive power machine bent on transforming this country into a neo-socialist nanny police state. We are waving goodbye to the 20th century and the republic we've had for the last 234 years, and are staring straight into the abyss of a dark future.

    August 11, 2010 at 3:19 pm |
  5. steve in florida

    I think it was. But the alternatives being offered up are turning that tide.
    I'm staring to notice the media starting to ask the all important questions of some of these Barnum and Bailey grade entrants, too. "Are you freakin' kidding me?" & "Are you serious?"

    August 11, 2010 at 3:28 pm |
  6. JOE CE

    Yes it is and the electorate.s inclination to go with slogans rather than intelligence analysis of issues is a prime reason for the present discontent. Lets all just oped for CHANGE again. Its like tomorrow, alwats just a day away and exactaly what we want it to be.

    August 11, 2010 at 3:29 pm |
  7. John from San Antonio

    The anti-incumbent fever is for real. the problem is that both parties continue to present the most incompetent people that can be found and more people are beginning to realize that electing a candidate with a different party affiliation is pointless. the parties differ strongly on gay marriage and other issues that mean nothing to our nations future but are steadfast in their support for all the destructive programs concerning the economy and the erosion of our constitutionally guaraenteed rights and freedoms.

    August 11, 2010 at 3:32 pm |
  8. Sylvia from San Diego

    I think your question should be, "Why are the idiots in those states giving those incumbents another chance"? How does that saying go, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me TWICE, SHAME ON ME".

    August 11, 2010 at 3:34 pm |
  9. Gary H. Boyd

    Only so long as those running against incumbents possess at least the mentality of a trained ape Jack. Recent results suggest that may not be the case. But, there's no doubt incumbents in both parties are an endangered species. Dumping the whole bunch and starting over,– even with trained apes, couldn't be any worse than what's there now. And just imagine what that would do for the banana market.

    Gary Boyd in Scottsdale, Arizona

    August 11, 2010 at 3:35 pm |
  10. Susan from Idaho

    Stupid is as stupid does Jack. If you have to have both feet removed from your mouth with the Jaws of Life, chances are you won't be elected to be dogcatcher. Some that are running for office should be running for their lives.

    August 11, 2010 at 3:35 pm |
  11. Bill in PA

    What ever sells. Anti, pro incumbent, that is the media story.

    The theater of elections is a wonder to behold.

    The outcomes are all pre-bought. The show for us in the public is only to create the illusion of choice and keep us paying for credit debt and working at minimum wages.

    The 1000 or so owners of the country have already made the decisions. Now is just sell time.

    August 11, 2010 at 3:42 pm |
  12. ejmounsey Granville Ohio

    It isn't a fever and it isn't real. The media covers exclusively those who are feverish.

    ejm Granville Ohio

    August 11, 2010 at 3:42 pm |
  13. mike

    Jack,the more we learn about the new ones,there more scared we get.

    New Jersey

    August 11, 2010 at 3:42 pm |
  14. Terry in Chandler, AZ

    Sure we have anti-incumbent fever, but, like most fevers, as time passes the fever will subside. We will wake up the morning of November 3 with few changes.

    August 11, 2010 at 3:49 pm |
  15. Lance, Ridgecrest, Ca

    Jack, only in some isolated cases. For the most part, voters are stupid. They will continue to whine and moan, while repeating the same mistakes from past years, with the false hope that this time their politician "has gotten the word"! They will insanely believe that if they return "their" politician to Congress he/she will change spots and reform and do what is right instead of what they are bribed to do. Insanity of the first order, and they will get exactly what they deserve.

    August 11, 2010 at 3:52 pm |
  16. chris

    yep throw th bum's out get someone who will sigh under oath they willl priomise to help the middle class over taxed americans if they break promises they made throw them out immediatly cause they did unbder oath and written contrat to us not just the usualy promise then get elected and break them

    August 11, 2010 at 3:54 pm |
  17. sandy

    As long as it's just about getting rid of the Republicans who are holding up progress in this country with either their stupid ideas or no ideas at all. I listen to this people and I am sometimes more than amazed at their blatant stupidity.

    August 11, 2010 at 3:57 pm |
  18. frankie

    Every bit as real as a phony plumber.

    August 11, 2010 at 3:58 pm |
  19. Rich McKinney, Texas

    I wouldn't call it a fever. I would call it a disease. I think people are getting tired of being lied to and bullshitted by politicians who claim to have answers to problems but never solve any. America is broke. Our government is broken and we would all have to fart just to have a scent in our collective back pockets. No one running for office has a solution or a clue and voting has become a waste of time. The only thing i have ever gotten out of voting in an election is a jury summons. that is it. I am done voting period.

    August 11, 2010 at 4:03 pm |
  20. Jim


    It is for Republicans. They're tossing out qualified candidates and nominating hyperventilating wingnuts that probably couldn't find Washington D.C even if they did win. You really have to wonder what in those teabags.

    Reno, Nevada

    August 11, 2010 at 4:03 pm |
  21. Minesh - Troy, MI

    Jack, the anti-incumbent fever for real. I am a Tea Party leader in Troy, MI. In the last three months, two out of three key note speakers were black, by the way.

    I have never seen so much energy against incumbents. Watch 8/28 Honor Rally in DC

    Minesh Baxi, Troy, MI

    August 11, 2010 at 4:13 pm |
  22. Docb

    I am not a Buck fan but he was at a comic gathering NOT A straight political function! His opponent did an edit for her campaign ads.! Just like Bennets opponent did on him but those were proved false!

    The incumbent issue is real but it may not apply to all incumbents but to the ones that have a history of being corporate shills not doing the peoples' business.

    Some of the angst is being stirred up by the media feeding off republican talking points and wishful thinking for ratings!. Midterms do turn out the 'through the bums out folks'!

    August 11, 2010 at 4:18 pm |
  23. paul

    Jack you are kidding right?? Do you remember what happened to the Roman Empire same thing we are doing.

    August 11, 2010 at 4:20 pm |
  24. Matthew W

    From Norfolk, VA
    I hope everyone is angry with them. All the government is good for is corruption and illegal, undeclared wars. A large part of the problem is right there in your article. Who will this state choose? A Democrat or a Republican? The Republicrats are all in a single, worthless group. Maybe when Americans quit voting solely based on party lines and we get politicians that are not bought and paid for our country will improve.

    August 11, 2010 at 4:25 pm |
  25. George in PA

    Most of these incumbents are no better than Benedict Arnold. They've sold out the government and its people to Big banks and lobbyists.

    If we don't vote them out ASAP we will share responsibilty for their future actions as they take us down the path to destruction for the American Dream.

    August 11, 2010 at 4:28 pm |
  26. Larry,Springfield,Ohio

    Jack,it is for real for real for me,this time around if you are not in office you get my vote,it doesn't matter if you are democrat,republican,independent,or communist,just as long as your different!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    August 11, 2010 at 4:30 pm |
  27. Lri - PA


    I think anti-incumbent fever is for real; that voters want peple up-to-date with current events and have a clue about what the American people want. But when you have someone who doesn't know that minimum wage for waiters and waitresses who receive tips IS lower than the federal minimum wage, you have to wonder if you will end up in an even worse situation if said person gets elected.

    August 11, 2010 at 4:31 pm |
  28. Dennis north Carolina

    If they have served 2 terms, they need to go home for good.

    August 11, 2010 at 4:33 pm |
  29. Johnny C (from Los Angeles)

    Hi Jack –

    Anti-incumbancy voting is not only very real, it will be very realistic. When was the last time that so many incumbants couldn't even make it to the primaries. I am positive that I will not be voting for Maxine Waters and she is my representative.

    August 11, 2010 at 4:37 pm |
  30. Shirley, OHIO

    No. It is a bunch of hogwash and we actually won't know, as you can see, until 10/8/2010.

    August 11, 2010 at 4:40 pm |
  31. Tom, Avon, Me, The Heart of Democracy

    The just say No party that was all about exporting our jobs, and all against rebuilding manufacturing and our auto industry are burning us up, but Congress people who have worked to get us out of this recession will keep their own jobs.

    August 11, 2010 at 4:40 pm |
  32. Nancy in St. Louis

    I believe it is true. The American people have had front row seats over the last several months on how the Congress and Senate operate. No one can come away feeling those leaders truly deserve to be there. More and more Americans are watching and seeing the tactics that make one wonder who they are working for – it certainly is not the American people. Bring in the personal indiscretions these people have gotten by with for years and I believe the majority of Americans do want the majority of the Congress and Senate replaced. As things look bad on all fronts right now, no one wants to step up and run for public office. Who can blame them.

    August 11, 2010 at 4:43 pm |
  33. Bertina

    If it were for real blue states would become red and red states would become blue because otherwise the states aren't really making any changes.

    August 11, 2010 at 4:47 pm |
  34. Diane Dagenais Turbide

    Hi Jack,

    What is real! So far, there is real difference between the world of personalities and news and the world of the american people!
    Got to admit...love these results!

    August 11, 2010 at 4:47 pm |
  35. Gail, Plano TX

    The so-called anti-incumbent rage is quickly becoming a myth. The only rage in these United States is the fact that a man of color holds the highest office in the land. Despite this, he is still popular, and loved. The crazies are showing themselves to be unqualified and moronic to hold office. But to be fair, look at at some of the idiots who are in Congress now! Only time will tell how this scenario plays out.

    August 11, 2010 at 4:49 pm |
  36. Karl from SF, CA

    No, Jack, everyone hates Congress as a group, to varying degrees, but most of us love our representatives individually and will re-elect them again and again. I live in San Francisco and will vote for Pelosi, Boxer and Feinstein. I’d vote out Boehner, Cantor, McConnell and Kyle, but that isn’t my prerogative. I’m sure their constituencies love them and dislike my representatives. The majorities can go back and forth, but a complete or even 50% turn over will never happen. Politics is local and we vote our congressmen in or out for local reasons. We love or hate Congress as a whole for national reasons. The Tea Party is just a passing fancy that will fade away in time, too. Most likely when Obama is no longer in the White House.

    August 11, 2010 at 4:50 pm |
  37. Brent, Cleveland, OH

    I think the "anti-incumbent fever" is exaggerated.

    There's a small group of very noisy Tea Partiers who seem more numerous and important than they really are, but I think this will be a pretty typical midterm election.

    The party in power always loses seats, and this year will be no different, but it won't be a blow-out like some pundits predict.

    August 11, 2010 at 4:50 pm |
  38. Kevin, Chester Springs, PA

    Yeah, it's for real... but NIMBY. All politics is local. And the results will depend on the candidate, his or her campaign, and his or her congressional record, if any. Although this broad-stroke notion is great for cable chatter, nothing is ever as simple as it sounds. Almost 3 months in political terms is an eternity. Anything can happen.

    August 11, 2010 at 4:57 pm |
  39. Jeff in E. Lyme, CT

    The so-called "Anti-Incumbent" movement is mainly an Urban Legend driven by Teabagging wannabees and Republicans with no platform.

    August 11, 2010 at 4:58 pm |
  40. Deb in Phoenix, AZ

    There are advantages to keeping incumbents because they've already gone through the Congressional learning curve. For the November election, everyday Americans like me are paying attention to the races, the issues and what has been accomplished in the last 18 months that benefits us in our daily lives. For example, I now have the ability to qualify for health insurance when I didn't before. The Democrats have accomplished a great deal considering the major mess the Republicans left for them, and the Republicans have nothing to offer except a return to their policies that only serve to make the wealthy even wealthier on the backs of the middle class. It's a no-brainer.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:07 pm |
  41. katiec Pekin, IL

    It appears the republicans cannot get or have a warped sense of the qualifications of people they are nominating. When you have your Angles, Bachmans, Pauls, Palins etc representing a party that is supposed to show responsibility, then you have a party in trouble.
    The American people are being insulted by the party who believes they are the best, when their actions prove otherwise.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:08 pm |
  42. Dee in New Paris

    I think everyone is sort of anti-incumbent, no matter what the party of the incumbent.

    I think people are just sick of the politicians who make a career of running for office, thanking their supporters with favors, and then running for office again.

    I just do not think this is what our Founding Fathers had in mind.

    But of course the Republicans are sort of frantic, because they really would like to get control again. Woe is us!

    August 11, 2010 at 5:10 pm |
  43. Jeff In Minnesota

    I think it's real, but it's hard to see with some of the lame brains that both parties are running. If this is our best and brightest, heaven help us all.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:12 pm |
  44. Greg, Hamilton Ontario

    That so called anti-incumbant fever is just stuff cooked up by the media to make ratings. Take any political topic and you will find angry big mouths on either side of it willing to speak first and think later. Also it's seldom they take the time to get the facts for themselves so they turn to the media and the circle is complete.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:14 pm |
  45. Gregory Miami Beach, FL.

    It seems The Tea Party never made it out of the TV screen, into the real world, giving Democrats a "Rocky Mountain High". As for Emer, a person who cannot comprehend what a tip is ( for service to you, over and above what their wage pays for them to do daily side work), Angle ( a real death panelist for our elderly benefits, Ken Buck thinks he's one of the "Mad Men", and McMahon whose work with our youth will keep 911 dispatchers busy with Domestic violence calls for years to come.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:14 pm |
  46. Ralph Spyer

    Jack Americans do not ,for the most part vote, for some we vote against some one. Congress is a circus we pict the best looking monkey

    August 11, 2010 at 5:14 pm |
  47. Nancy, Tennessee

    The fever is real for those who have caught it. However, the anti-incumbent voters lose their vote when the people who have no idea of "who" stands for what enters the voting booths. Sadly, they only remember the incumbents' names when they vote. So "who" remains in office while the "I don't know them" loses. Sounds like an Abott and Costello skit which only proves American politics is a joke.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:15 pm |
  48. Loren

    Oh, that it were so, but incumbents have more money to spend on advertising generally and familiarity with the name leads to votes. It desn't help that while the Tea Party is well meaning, it is an ad hoc coalition and those who are being backed don'tgo through the vetting process that party candidates do (and even that is falliable, witness Ted Giannoulis running for the U.S. Senate seat for Illinois, and how tainted his background has proven to be).

    August 11, 2010 at 5:15 pm |
  49. Joane

    It's for real Jack. We need to clean the Congress up......earmarks,
    and all the corrupt activities need to be cleaned up. The unbelievable spending that appears as though the Congress and Whitehouse is trying to bankrupt this country has to be stopped SOON !

    August 11, 2010 at 5:16 pm |
  50. Gigi Oregon

    I believe it's all hype from the media. And will continue to support my candidates with out the help of the media. The fear mongering from the right has become outdated also. They are like the boy that cried wolf, until they are no longer creditable. It's time to report the news not make it up.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:17 pm |
  51. Jon Clark

    It's only real on the Republican side.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:17 pm |
  52. William from Kansas


    Of course it is real. However as long as Sarah Palin and other right-wing extremists keep on showing public support for the Republican challengers, then it will make the fever much less noticeable.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:17 pm |
  53. Ray in Nashville

    Americans may well be sick and tired of their members of congress, but now that the primaries are over, they are looking over what the opposition is offering up: a lady who thinks we should do away with social security (and is suing her opponent to make sure he doesn't remind people that she said so;) a gentleman who thinks our government was too tough on BP during the oil spill crisis AND thinks that same government shouldn't interfere in "little" issues like discrimination, among others. Maybe the incumbents don't look so bad.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:18 pm |
  54. Scott Stodden

    It's As Real As All That Oil That Is Still In The Gulf Jack! People Are Tired And I Repeat TIRED Of Politics As Usual And All These Republicans Who Keep Saying No, No, No,! I Know Myself Im Only Voting For Democrats Come November Because Republicans Have Not Come Up With One Single Solitary Plan To Help Us Get Out Of The Mess We're In They Just Keep Saying No, No, No! This Mid-Term Election I Said It Before And I'll Say It Again That Democrats Will Lose Seats In Both The House And Senate But Will The Democratic Party Lose The Majority In Both Houses? Here's A Hint No!

    Scott Stodden (Freeport,Illinois)

    August 11, 2010 at 5:19 pm |
  55. Scott Childers

    Of course not, Jack. Republicans are about to defy conventional wisdom and Obama has a real possibility of holding both house and senate. Only the far right wing was capable of salvaging Harry Reid's career.

    One can only hope he does something with this opportunity......

    August 11, 2010 at 5:20 pm |
  56. Ruth, Peshtigo, Wi.

    Only in the media

    August 11, 2010 at 5:20 pm |
  57. southerncousin

    Yes it is and republicans should make great gains. Unfortunately, republicans tend to run "real" people rather than the slicked up liars that the unions and democrats run (eg. Barrack Obama) so they probably won't pick up as many seats as they need to take control. Hopefully, by 2012, the fiasco that is liberalism will be apparent to even the "kool aid" drinking dems won't be able to lie their way through and the we finally get some sanity back in this country.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:20 pm |
  58. Tracy - Tampa Fla.

    Yes the fever is real. here in Florida we have a senate race running and the incumbent Rep. McCollum has shown us just how one-sided and Ignorant these long term politicians can be. I firmly believe that we should vote out most of those who have had seats for a long period of time. Put in new blood, it will take them time to figure out how to get the up on us.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:20 pm |
  59. sue kensill

    Of course it isn't real, Jack. All the Republicans can come up with is a campaign of smoke and mirrors. They don't have anything to run on except fear and lies, as usual.
    Sue Kensill

    August 11, 2010 at 5:20 pm |
  60. Liberal4Obama

    The problem for Republicans is this, they look good on paper but once you realize what they really stand for like repealing healthcare, dumping the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution and giving tax breaks to the top 2% of the population, the American people run to the arms of Democrats.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:20 pm |
  61. Hammond Man

    I think the so called Tea-Party leaders and a few of its loud racists are making things and election of the republicans much more hard than they should be. Unless they come up with a better solution that will help the country out of this Bush (republican) mess they have created.
    Jack, just don't listen to those pondants on Tvs and radios.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:20 pm |
  62. Chaney, La.

    Not in Louisiana it aint..... we will vote David[DC. Madam]Vitter back in office...... some states are smarter than others I guess.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:21 pm |
  63. Michael Armstrong Sr. Tx.

    There's only one person that the people wants gone and replaced and that's the speaker of the house republicans winning seats would be a plus .

    August 11, 2010 at 5:21 pm |
  64. Michael

    Anti-incumbent fever would be a reality if the Tea Party wasn't a factor. They are destroying the Republican party, and if elected I fear they would do the same to the country.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:21 pm |
  65. Mark from Boston


    Pessimistic people will always find something to be angry about. Instead of counting their blessings they would rather complain and point fingers. In the past year and a half, republicans have filibustered more bills than in the past decade combined. They need to expand their vocabulary beyond "NO" and "ReFudiate". It's sad that "Americans" can't compromise in order to solve our common problems. To those experiencing adversity for the first time, I simply would like to welcome you to the back of the bus.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:21 pm |
  66. Frank Cape Coral FL

    Jack thats a great question, I wish I knew the answer, but the only info i have to go on is what I see on the news, and you know how that goes, if you watch one channel it's twisted their way and vice- versa , so I going to throw my 2-cent into this question and take a uneducated guess and say I really don't have a clue, do you?

    August 11, 2010 at 5:22 pm |
  67. ken, atlantic city, nj

    no. It is the same ole same o. The voters just do not get it.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:22 pm |
  68. Rich McKinney, Texas

    Jack politics has become nothing more then a pass time for voters. The politicians have made it a mockery. They dance around an election catering to those that they want favor from and then fold to those with deep pockets. In a screwed up disfunctional two party system like we have in America it is nothing more then a waste of time to show up to the polls and vote.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:22 pm |
  69. Talana from Las Vegas

    It seems like every election cycle there is always the "anti-incumbent" fever stories, at least it seems that way since I began voting in 2000. While voters may be tired of those in office, it seems that if we switch them out every 2 years, nothing ever gets done.

    As far as the Reid/Angle race in Nevada, if you put forth a CRAZY lady against a long time politician, it is pretty hard for just anti-incumbent fever to push her to victory. When all Harry Reid has to do for attack ads is to play her own words, equating Social Security to welfare, calling the BP fund a slush fund, and saying that it's not her job to bring industry to the state, you know that there was a huge misfire in bring forth a worthwhile candidate.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:22 pm |
  70. JC

    Anti-Incumbant ferver is real, but so is being disenfranchised by both the Democratic and Republican parties. Incumbants get substantial amounts of money from both the party and wealthy private donors (cough corporate influences to push agenda) This makes it almost impossible for grassroots challengers with good policy ideas and little money to win in a primary. It is incredibly easy to hold on to a seat between the gap in financial support and low voter turnout in primaries. Perhaps the turnout is low because the people know they are just going to get more of the same thing from either party.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:23 pm |
  71. David haynes

    Not for real. Just "Repulican Wishful" fever accompanied by the usual visual and auditory hallucinations

    August 11, 2010 at 5:23 pm |
  72. Annick B.

    Let's hope not. The idea of having more moronic and bigoted right-wingers in the Congress makes me cringe.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:23 pm |
  73. Alan Waters

    Most unencumbered incumbents remain as useless as a cucumber in Cumberland.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:23 pm |
  74. Lucy

    Jack, I am a democrat from New York state who will be voting all Republican this year to make a point. I will vote for my democrat congressman, but otherwise look out.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:23 pm |
  75. Bob Mears

    You answered your question, with your question. Bob in Beautiful Arizona

    August 11, 2010 at 5:23 pm |
  76. James Freed

    I don't see a big change, I'm tired of sound bites and no real solutions or new thinking from the Republicians. Here in Oregon the Governors race Republician Dudley won't debate the Democrate Kitzhaber, missed a good opportunity. No really knows how he can help Oregon when Kitahaber has a great track record as an x-governor.
    The party of no seems to be earning a good reputation for doing nothing, not even talking with the Democrates.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:23 pm |
  77. Judy

    I think Americans will remember who got them in this mess.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:24 pm |
  78. Annie, Atlanta

    With all the incumbents who have already won, probably not. My guess is Corporate America has already sunk millions into their congressional investment. Heck, they've already paid for and properly trained them. Why start from scratch?

    August 11, 2010 at 5:24 pm |
  79. Kevin

    It's real incumbent anger and I hope they are getting the message on both sides of the isle. Democrats should be nervous after the general public put faith in them and what did they deliver, more of the same Washington insider horse trading and regulation writing. While the Republicans anti everything zeal just shows you they have no real solutions of their own, since it was they're leadership that got is here. When will Washington truly put the people first instead of the special interest they clearly owe.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:24 pm |
  80. Rick in Texas

    I find it laughable that just because an incumbent wins a primary that was supported by Obama suddenly the anti-incumbent fever has stopped. It should be noted that Bennet said this morning he wasn't sure if he even wanted Obama to campaign for him. From a Republican standpoint, the loser in their primary received more votes than Bennet the winner did. That says something about voter intensity. But no Jack, the incumbents from both parties are still in deep trouble, if not in the primaries, then the general election for sure.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:24 pm |
  81. TommyP

    Anti-incumbent fever is a product of the news media and the right-wing agenda. The US population voted for change with Obama and we're actually getting it! More change, for the better, will come with continued support of the Dems. That's a fact.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:25 pm |
  82. Dianne

    Yes I think it is, but it seems that any newcomers that may be qualified and/or willing to do the job aren't much better than what we're trying to get rid of.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:25 pm |
  83. Paul

    Of course it is real, the biggest reason being the economy. No matter which party is in power, that will always be the case for incumbents when times are bad. But reality is also in the eyes of the beholder and which of the the various news mediums you follow. Sadly, those who believe the current administration's pre-election promises are suffering from buyer's remorse and it is indeed painful to admit.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:25 pm |
  84. Tom Gunn

    Yes, Jack, anti-incumbent fever is real but the question is, what's the alternative? As you yourself pointed out, the opposition are largely morons. It's still a case of having to hold our noses and pick the lesser of two evils and a pox on BOTH their houses.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:25 pm |
  85. PiedType

    Oh, the fever is real enough. But you'd think those fevered minds would realize they still have to offer qualified alternatives if they want to win - and be able to live with the results.


    August 11, 2010 at 5:25 pm |
  86. Jim Blevins

    Bennet not only got Obama's support, but he also got direct help form Obama's Organizing for America. The Tea Party has enough angry supporters to move the Republican Party. So basically we have fanatics driving the Republicans vs established organization driving the Democrats. Hopefully, anti-establishment will sabotage the Republicans and leave the Democrats largely untouched.

    Jim, Craig, CO

    August 11, 2010 at 5:25 pm |
  87. Gary

    FINALLY! Someone that says what the evidence suggests... NO NO NO! It ISN'T for real.... the "news" is making too big a deal about the unrest against Dems. Earlier this year, early summer (?), there were a bunch of races (primaries) – the stat I heard was that 83 of 85 were incumbents! AND STILL the news media insisted that there was this big uprising. BUNCH! It would be nice if the news actually thought instead of tailoring their news by the emotional reactions of the public.
    [I get my news more from The Daily Show as, even though its comedy – it has the truth embedded in it – a shame I know – but a reality nonetheless.]

    August 11, 2010 at 5:25 pm |
  88. Mike Blanchard

    The anti-incumbent fever is an invention of the media. All this hoopla about the Tea Party has politicians living in fear. People vote on issues not Washington affiliation. Better to stick with the bums you know...we don't need any new ones. Given enough time they'll be just as lazy and corrupt as the incumbents!
    Mike B-

    August 11, 2010 at 5:26 pm |
  89. Jane - Seattle

    Yes it is real but it seems we are apathetic because we no longer produce leaders and statesmen/women. Instead we settle for politicians – people who can read a script but can't reason based on the Constitution and vote as dictated by special interests, not their constitutents.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:27 pm |
  90. kent

    Yes, but .... In the last election voters were so disgusted by the Republican agenda that they voted the bums out. The Democrats took that as a mandate for a far-left agenda. Now the same thing is happening: voters are disgusted with the Democratic far left agenda and want to vote the bums out. But rather than seeing it as a vote for rational moderation, Republicans candidates, including the tea party nuts (read Sharon Angle) , think it's a vote to return to the Bush years. I think the Republicans are in the process of blowing another opportunity.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:27 pm |
  91. r3volution

    Hello Jack – There certainly is a feel of anti-incumbency throughout the country. However, whether or not that corresponds to opposition votes this term is yet to be seen. I maintain that a much better approach is anti-incompetency instead.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:27 pm |
  92. Doug

    I think more people are anti-incumbent than usual, but it won't amount to much change. If we vote the bums out, we'll just get new bums

    August 11, 2010 at 5:27 pm |
  93. Ron in WA

    Anti-incumbent fever is for real but at the end of the day the candidate voters trust and agree with the most will win.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:28 pm |
  94. Jake

    I think the whole anti-incumbent movement is over hyped by the media. If there really was a movement, we would see massive marches in the streets and young people getting involved. Youth is always the backbone of a movement and so far I am not seeing that at this time. What we actually see are groups of older citizens who are afraid to embrace any sort of change.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:28 pm |
  95. Jeff

    Sure it's real for the moment. And maybe the congress needs a overhaul but the reality of it all is election time will tell the real story. When it comes down to it, it depend on the turn out. The professional incumbents rather Dem or Rep will in most cases win in there state..

    August 11, 2010 at 5:29 pm |
  96. David jr from whitney point, ny

    republicans are a circus and quitter and money hungry wailin' Sarah Palin is thier ring leader. I don't think it is incumbent fever, I feel this is the most politically divided our country has been. The polls reflect it, so many politcally charged decisions, made over a wide range of topics that are politically charged is also stirring up the political rivalries that have always been there. The rivalries are just know becoming evident in the publics eye. The press is a reflection on what is really going on behind the seens and american voters are letting politicians know what they think through the polls.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:29 pm |
  97. Allen in Hartwell GA

    Jack, the "anti-incumbent" fever you speak applies only to Republican voters and Democrat office holders. That being the case, I'd expect 90-percent of the incumbents to be reelected.
    Hartwell GA

    August 11, 2010 at 5:31 pm |
  98. Harold

    Jack,I wish that anti-incumbent fever was for real. However, the incumbents are incumbents because they have learned to attack but not say anything stupid. They can patiently wait for their opponents to show their stupidity.
    New Orleans

    August 11, 2010 at 5:31 pm |
  99. Michael M, Phoenix AZ

    Sen John McCain was on a local morning news show this AM, and even he mentioned the "anti-incumbent" attitude. He sounded like the same ole John McCain that ran for President in 2008. He still blames Pres Obama for everything, even though the President just can't sent 6000 National Guard troops to the border. However, I don't think he believes it applies to him. With most comments that get posted about McCain and JD Hayworth, the majority are against McCain being re-elected. And this from a highly Republican conservative state. I think most of is now coming from McCain's highly negative ad towards his opponent. I don't think McCain spends too much time even reading the Arizona Republic Opinions section to find out is being said about him.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:32 pm |
  100. Cal


    Yes and no. Are we tired of the incumbents (both parties) and all the shinnanigans, YES. Is this really a fervor by the masses to replace them, No. The noise is coming from certain groups (both left or right wing) and people who are not representative of the majority of us, the moderate center.
    The majority of us want the politicians and special interests (both sides) to quit the games and get down to business, the business of getting this country back in shape and on a 'positive' path.

    Denver, CO

    August 11, 2010 at 5:33 pm |
  101. Brian

    No, it is a media/republican hyped story that doesn't exist. Democrats may or may not lose big in November. It all depends on voter turnout. Anti-incumbent is really about an anti-democrat meme being pushed by Republicans with you as their bullhorn. The media seems hell bent for leather to get the republicans to the voting booths.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:35 pm |
  102. Renee, Ill.

    It's not anti-incumbent fever, it's anti-politician fever; because none of them really work for us, they just pretend to. It's interpreted as anti-incumbent by those not currently in office. But come election time it'll be the same old story for most of us. Which candidate represents the lesser of two evils?

    August 11, 2010 at 5:36 pm |
  103. Jan - Lancaster, PA

    Honestly think the media is making more of an issue out of it than it really is. Really believe most people try to evaluate the candidates for their commitment to serving their constituency rather than specifically to a party agenda. There are good and bad candidates on both sides and it is necessary for all of us to pay attention. Our quality of life is slipping away too fast to permit the large corporate influence to take it all away from us. The moderates on both sides who try to work together to get things done are the ones who should be governing as they are working for the country, and not big money, religious extremists, or kooks.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:36 pm |
  104. Chandra Aliu

    Jack, do you remember the Government decade old pragmatic foreign policy of the "Lesser of two evils." during the cold world-era. The American populace are no fools; voters are just following the footsteps of the government by strategically voting the lesser of two evil.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:37 pm |
  105. Bob horton

    The anti-encumbert fever is hot and real. The Bush republicans have no real policies or solutions to drive us out of this deep ditch, WE need REAL people with Real solutions to all Americans. Animosity and hatred serves no public good.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:39 pm |
  106. Allen in Hartwell GA

    Jack, the "anti-incumbent" fever you speak of applies only to Republican voters and Democrat office holders. That being the case, I'd expect 90-percent of the incumbents to be reelected.
    Hartwell GA

    August 11, 2010 at 5:40 pm |
  107. Tory St. Simons Island, GA

    Absolutely it's real, Jack. People are tired of illegals taking our jobs when there are none for citizens and other politicians have pussy-footing around the invasion with PC garbage. This anger comes from not listening to the electorate, as with. mandatory health care too.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:41 pm |
  108. John Hidalgo

    Of course not. How do we know? Well, a majority of a single party will sustain seats in the House this fall. Furthermore, it is likely that Republicans will "sustain" and win significant seats in the House this November. The question instead should be, " Is this years anti-Democratic Fever for real? " It is safe to say that a Democratic Majority in the House and Senate have passed bills at the top of their parties agenda. Furthermore, these Democratic victory's such as the stimulus package, the healhcare bill, and extending unemployment benefits are not being touted by the Democratic incumbents. Why? Could it be that the legislation passed by the Democrats are not exactly what the American people wanted. Could it be that the legislation passed by this Congress and President is whats driving down their poll numbers. If not, then why not run on this Record, why not tout the victory of this legislation, instead of running against George W Bush. Since we currently have a Democratic President and Majority in Both the House and Senate. It is safe to say that they have passed their policy and legislation, which in return is out of touch with Mainstream American, Hence the poll numbers. Yes, the anti- Democratic Fever is real.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:43 pm |
  109. lynnej in nc

    I don't think that is so much of anti-incumbent, but more of the 'what have you done for me lately?' thing going on.

    If you have a representative may they be in the Senate or House and they refuse to work with the majority party or offer up alternative SOUND ideas, not the regurgitated trickle down theory, they need to go.

    They can't just get up there and vote NO and never offer anything in return. They work for us. We don't work for them.

    To get either side to do something, federally mandated term limits would work wonders.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:46 pm |
  110. R Harrison, SC

    Anti-incumbent fever is real. But the candidates that would unseat them are even worse. To make matters even worse, there are no Republican plans to do anything other than be against whatever the Dems propose – even those proposals contain Repub suggestions. A new bunch of "nobodies with no plans" is not a winning combination. It all boils down to what it has always has: pick he lesser of two evils.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:48 pm |
  111. Bill from Kansas

    Yes Jack people are tired of both parties. I wish we had more independents to vote for. The Tea Party is becoming a sub-party to the Republicans. We need more options.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:49 pm |
  112. barbara

    The Tea Party types seemingly are wackos. They want their services but want to pay no taxes. There's no logic to their demands. Sarah is a nice looking gal but doesn't put a lot of work into forming her opinions. She doesn't look beyond the sound bite and neither do her followers.

    August 11, 2010 at 5:52 pm |