There is just no other way to put it. The Democrats were beaten bad in last night's midterm.
House
Republicans have picked up at least 10 seats raising their minimum seat count in the next congress to 243, one more than the 242 they had after the 2010 elections and their are 14 races yet to be called.
Senate
Republicans held all of their own seats and picked up seats in: West Virginia, South Dakota, Montana, Arkansas, Colorado, North Carolina and Iowa for a minimum pickup of 7. And there are 2 races to be decided: Alaska, where Republican Dan Sullivan leads incumbent Senator Mark Begich by 4 points, but it has yet to be called, and Louisiana where it will head to a runoff in December,
Three Democratic incumbents have been defeated: Mark Pryor in Arkansas, Mark Uall in Colorado and Kay Hagan in North Carolina. This could go as high as 5 if Mark Begich loses in Alaska and Mary Landrieu loses in Louisiana.
Democrats held off a challenge by Scott Brown in New Hampshire and will also likely win in Virginia where the elections results gave a scare to Democrats turning out to be much closer than they had thought.
Gubernatorial
Republicans lost Pennsylvania decisively, incumbent Governor Corbett lost to Democrat Tom Wolf and look likely to lose Alaska where independent candidate Bill Walker is leading Republican Governor Sean Parnell.
But they held onto the rest of their seats. They fended off challenges in Wisconsin, Florida, Maine, and Kansas. While they picked up seats in: Arkansas, Illinois, Massachusetts and Maryland.
Republicans lost one incumbent, Pennsylvania and will lose two if Parnell loses in Alaska. Democrats only lost one incumbent, in Illinois.
Wednesday, November 5, 2014
Monday, November 3, 2014
Last Minute Election Thoughts
Most pundits think Republicans will take the Senate and make modest gains in the House. But most also think Republicans are in for some losses in the Governors' races.
House
No one seriously thinks Republicans will lose the House, or even lose seats from their majority, but there are not a whole lot of seats left for them to win. In 2010 the GOP picked up 63 seats, almost reaching the limits of how many seats it was statistically possible for them to win. In 2012 they lost 8 seats, and this years they will get some or all of them back, and if they are really lucky just a few more.
But the high 240s are the limit of what the GOP can realistically win, and at this point I'm guessing they will gain 7-8 seats.
Senate
Republicans are in for gains tomorrow, that much is sure, but how many? That is the question. They will almost certainly take West Virginia, South Dakota and Montana. That brings them up to 48 seats. Then there is Arkansas which is almost as certain to go Republican. That brings them to 49. That is the extent of the sure or almost sure bets.
After that there is Alaska, which is leaning Republican but there is a small chance the Democratic Senator Mark Begich could hold on. Then there is Louisiana which will probably go to a runoff, but the Republican is favored to win, however Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu has beaten the odds before, but I think this year that will change. If Republicans take both races they reach 51 seats, and take control of the Senate.
Then there are Colorado and Iowa. Colorado Democratic Senator Mark Udall looks like he is in a lot of trouble, he is consistently behind and his challenger Cory Gardener has run a great campaign, which could also be said about the race in Iowa, Republican Joni Ernst has run a solid campaign and Congressman Bruce Braley has made a series of mistakes that has turned this seat from an almost sure Democratic hold to a tossup with the Republican favored to win. Having said that only one poll as of now has this race more than a 2 point race so an upset win by Braley is possible, but I would say Ernst has the edge. If Republicans take both seats they will have 53 seats in the Senate, but then there are the Democrat pick up opportunities to deal with.
There are only 3: Kentucky, Georgia and Kansas (most people think independent Greg Orman will side with Democrats if elected). In Kentucky it looks like Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has begun to build a lead and this seat is no longer endangered. In Georgia Democrat Michelle Nunn has managed to distance herself from Obama while David Perdue (the Republican) has run a bad race, even though he still leads and is slightly favored to win this will likely go to a runoff in January because to a candidate must win more than 50% of the vote and a libertarian candidate is pulling about 4% of the vote away from Perdue. Mr. Perdue is favored to win in January, but there is always the possibility of a Democrat upset win, even in November with exceptionally high black turnout.
The other race is the one Republicans really have to worry about, Kansas. Three term Senator Pat Roberts is consistently (although very slightly) behind independent candidate Greg Orman who will likely side with Democrats if he wins. Roberts is stuck in the low 40s and can't get any higher so unless Republican turnout is sky high this race looks like a loss for the GOP.
There are two long shots for Republicans but I doubt they will win either, but there is a small chance, North Carolina and New Hampshire. In North Carolina Senator Kay Hagan (D) has maintained a consistent lead over Thom Tillis (R), although the lead is small and Hagan is under 50%, but high Dem turnout and a libertarian candidate will likely save her. In New Hampshire Scott Brown (R) had no chance at all until a few weeks ago, Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D) has made a series of gaffes and Brown has run a great campaign. But Shaheen's popularity is close to 50% and has been consistently ahead so she will likely hold on. But if either of these Races go Republican it will be a very long night for the Democrats.
There is still a path for holding onto the Senate for the Democrats and here it is: Take Kansas and hold unto at least 2 out of 3 of: Iowa, Louisiana, and Colorado or one out of three and take Georgia.
Governorships
Democrats are expected to take Pennsylvania for almost certain and look to also take Florida, Kansas and probably Maine. They also have decent chances in Wisconsin and Michigan but are by no means close to sure wins.
Republicans will almost certainly take Arkansas, and could take Colorado, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Illinois and Rhode Island, but they are tossups at best.
When all is said and done Democrats can expect to gain up to 5 seats and a worst case scenario lose 1 or 2 net.
House
No one seriously thinks Republicans will lose the House, or even lose seats from their majority, but there are not a whole lot of seats left for them to win. In 2010 the GOP picked up 63 seats, almost reaching the limits of how many seats it was statistically possible for them to win. In 2012 they lost 8 seats, and this years they will get some or all of them back, and if they are really lucky just a few more.
But the high 240s are the limit of what the GOP can realistically win, and at this point I'm guessing they will gain 7-8 seats.
Senate
Republicans are in for gains tomorrow, that much is sure, but how many? That is the question. They will almost certainly take West Virginia, South Dakota and Montana. That brings them up to 48 seats. Then there is Arkansas which is almost as certain to go Republican. That brings them to 49. That is the extent of the sure or almost sure bets.
After that there is Alaska, which is leaning Republican but there is a small chance the Democratic Senator Mark Begich could hold on. Then there is Louisiana which will probably go to a runoff, but the Republican is favored to win, however Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu has beaten the odds before, but I think this year that will change. If Republicans take both races they reach 51 seats, and take control of the Senate.
Then there are Colorado and Iowa. Colorado Democratic Senator Mark Udall looks like he is in a lot of trouble, he is consistently behind and his challenger Cory Gardener has run a great campaign, which could also be said about the race in Iowa, Republican Joni Ernst has run a solid campaign and Congressman Bruce Braley has made a series of mistakes that has turned this seat from an almost sure Democratic hold to a tossup with the Republican favored to win. Having said that only one poll as of now has this race more than a 2 point race so an upset win by Braley is possible, but I would say Ernst has the edge. If Republicans take both seats they will have 53 seats in the Senate, but then there are the Democrat pick up opportunities to deal with.
There are only 3: Kentucky, Georgia and Kansas (most people think independent Greg Orman will side with Democrats if elected). In Kentucky it looks like Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has begun to build a lead and this seat is no longer endangered. In Georgia Democrat Michelle Nunn has managed to distance herself from Obama while David Perdue (the Republican) has run a bad race, even though he still leads and is slightly favored to win this will likely go to a runoff in January because to a candidate must win more than 50% of the vote and a libertarian candidate is pulling about 4% of the vote away from Perdue. Mr. Perdue is favored to win in January, but there is always the possibility of a Democrat upset win, even in November with exceptionally high black turnout.
The other race is the one Republicans really have to worry about, Kansas. Three term Senator Pat Roberts is consistently (although very slightly) behind independent candidate Greg Orman who will likely side with Democrats if he wins. Roberts is stuck in the low 40s and can't get any higher so unless Republican turnout is sky high this race looks like a loss for the GOP.
There are two long shots for Republicans but I doubt they will win either, but there is a small chance, North Carolina and New Hampshire. In North Carolina Senator Kay Hagan (D) has maintained a consistent lead over Thom Tillis (R), although the lead is small and Hagan is under 50%, but high Dem turnout and a libertarian candidate will likely save her. In New Hampshire Scott Brown (R) had no chance at all until a few weeks ago, Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D) has made a series of gaffes and Brown has run a great campaign. But Shaheen's popularity is close to 50% and has been consistently ahead so she will likely hold on. But if either of these Races go Republican it will be a very long night for the Democrats.
There is still a path for holding onto the Senate for the Democrats and here it is: Take Kansas and hold unto at least 2 out of 3 of: Iowa, Louisiana, and Colorado or one out of three and take Georgia.
Governorships
Democrats are expected to take Pennsylvania for almost certain and look to also take Florida, Kansas and probably Maine. They also have decent chances in Wisconsin and Michigan but are by no means close to sure wins.
Republicans will almost certainly take Arkansas, and could take Colorado, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Illinois and Rhode Island, but they are tossups at best.
When all is said and done Democrats can expect to gain up to 5 seats and a worst case scenario lose 1 or 2 net.
Tuesday, October 7, 2014
Republicans May Win the Senate, but it's not a Lock
The math is simply against the Democrats this year, they will lose seats in November, multiple seats. Many say they will lose they Senate, and they might, but it is not a certainty.
There are 36 seats up for grabs in the Senate in November and the Democrats are defending 21 compared to Republicans who are defending only 15. Many are safe for one party or the other, but ?? have a reasonable chance for a pick up for one party or the the other.
Dem Pickup Possibilities
The Democrats have only 3 seats where there is a reasonable chance for a pickup.
1. Georgia- This is race where the Republican is ahead, but not far enough to call it safe.
2. Kansas- Incumbent Senator Pat Roberts is easily the most endangered Republican in the senate. He is facing independent Greg Orman who has said he will caucus with whoever wins the senate, but many think if the senate is 50/50, a distinct possibility, he will go with the Democrats. He has been a Democrat and a Republican in the past, but his last run at elective office was as a Democrat.
3. Kentucky- Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has survived close elections before, and he has pulled ahead in this race, but with his low popularity there is always an outside chance he may lose.
Republican Pickup Possibilities
There are several seats where Republicans could take seats from the Democrats. Some are all but certain, others are long shots, still others are in-between.
1. Alaska- One term Senator Mark Begich won this seat narrowly against a badly damaged incumbent in a terrible environment for Republicans and is seeking another term. He has been behind and ahead in the race, but always under 50% and Alaska is a Republican state. At best this is a toss up, at worst a lean Republican seat.
2. Arkansas has been trending more and more Republican and despite his family name Senator Mark Pryor is in real trouble. This seat is leaning toward a Republican pick up, but is not a slam dunk.
3. Colorado- This was thought to be a likely Dem hold but recent polls have put Republican Cory Gardener ahead of incumbent Senator Mark Udall. If this trend continues I'd say this is another lean Republican seat, but these polls may be a flash in the pan.
4. Iowa- This was likely Dem hold until recent polls showed Republican Joni Ernst tied or ahead of Democrat Bruce Braley. But these polls may not hold or be outliers. Until more polls come out showing a trend I will assume Democrats will hold this seat.
5. Louisiana- Polls show Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu well under 50% and in some cases behind Republican Bill Cassidy in a race with two other Republicans. This race will almost certainly go to a runoff in December. And Landrieu is likely to lose, although she has survived the unpopularity of her party before in elections that were very bad for Democrats, so anything is possible.
6. Michigan- Possibly a sleeper race as polls have shown it close, but the GOP's unpopularity in federal statewide elections in this state must give the Democrats and advantage.
7. Minnesota- A long shot but Republicans have a slim chance to unseat Al Franken.
8. Montana- An all but certain Republican pickup.
9. New Hampshire- Polls have narrowed, but I believe Democrat Jeanne Shaheen will hold this seat against Republican former Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown.
10. North Carolina- Democrat Kay Hagan has managed to stay ahead in a somewhat red state in a bad environment for Democrats by running against the state legislature. I'd say right now it is leaning toward a Dem hold, but is by no means safe. For now I'd call it a Democrat hold.
11. South Dakota- This has become a 4 way race with one of the candidates being former Republican Senator Larry Pressler, but Republicans are heavily favored to take this seat from the Democrats.
12. Virginia- Republicans were hopeful to take this seat from Dem incumbent Mark Warner but were never able to get any traction. This seat is safe for the Democrats and only mentioned because Republicans had hopes of winning it.
13. West Virginia- This state is becoming more Republican every year, which is probably why Senator Jay Rockefeller decided not to run for reelection. This seat is all but a guaranteed Republican pickup.
There are 36 seats up for grabs in the Senate in November and the Democrats are defending 21 compared to Republicans who are defending only 15. Many are safe for one party or the other, but ?? have a reasonable chance for a pick up for one party or the the other.
Dem Pickup Possibilities
The Democrats have only 3 seats where there is a reasonable chance for a pickup.
1. Georgia- This is race where the Republican is ahead, but not far enough to call it safe.
2. Kansas- Incumbent Senator Pat Roberts is easily the most endangered Republican in the senate. He is facing independent Greg Orman who has said he will caucus with whoever wins the senate, but many think if the senate is 50/50, a distinct possibility, he will go with the Democrats. He has been a Democrat and a Republican in the past, but his last run at elective office was as a Democrat.
3. Kentucky- Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has survived close elections before, and he has pulled ahead in this race, but with his low popularity there is always an outside chance he may lose.
There are several seats where Republicans could take seats from the Democrats. Some are all but certain, others are long shots, still others are in-between.
1. Alaska- One term Senator Mark Begich won this seat narrowly against a badly damaged incumbent in a terrible environment for Republicans and is seeking another term. He has been behind and ahead in the race, but always under 50% and Alaska is a Republican state. At best this is a toss up, at worst a lean Republican seat.
2. Arkansas has been trending more and more Republican and despite his family name Senator Mark Pryor is in real trouble. This seat is leaning toward a Republican pick up, but is not a slam dunk.
3. Colorado- This was thought to be a likely Dem hold but recent polls have put Republican Cory Gardener ahead of incumbent Senator Mark Udall. If this trend continues I'd say this is another lean Republican seat, but these polls may be a flash in the pan.
4. Iowa- This was likely Dem hold until recent polls showed Republican Joni Ernst tied or ahead of Democrat Bruce Braley. But these polls may not hold or be outliers. Until more polls come out showing a trend I will assume Democrats will hold this seat.
5. Louisiana- Polls show Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu well under 50% and in some cases behind Republican Bill Cassidy in a race with two other Republicans. This race will almost certainly go to a runoff in December. And Landrieu is likely to lose, although she has survived the unpopularity of her party before in elections that were very bad for Democrats, so anything is possible.
6. Michigan- Possibly a sleeper race as polls have shown it close, but the GOP's unpopularity in federal statewide elections in this state must give the Democrats and advantage.
7. Minnesota- A long shot but Republicans have a slim chance to unseat Al Franken.
8. Montana- An all but certain Republican pickup.
9. New Hampshire- Polls have narrowed, but I believe Democrat Jeanne Shaheen will hold this seat against Republican former Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown.
10. North Carolina- Democrat Kay Hagan has managed to stay ahead in a somewhat red state in a bad environment for Democrats by running against the state legislature. I'd say right now it is leaning toward a Dem hold, but is by no means safe. For now I'd call it a Democrat hold.
11. South Dakota- This has become a 4 way race with one of the candidates being former Republican Senator Larry Pressler, but Republicans are heavily favored to take this seat from the Democrats.
12. Virginia- Republicans were hopeful to take this seat from Dem incumbent Mark Warner but were never able to get any traction. This seat is safe for the Democrats and only mentioned because Republicans had hopes of winning it.
13. West Virginia- This state is becoming more Republican every year, which is probably why Senator Jay Rockefeller decided not to run for reelection. This seat is all but a guaranteed Republican pickup.
Final Analysis
Of the Republican seats I'd say only one will be picked up by the Dems, Kansas.
Of the Democratic seats 3 are a sure thing for Republicans: Montana, South Dakota, and West Virginia.
3 lean toward a Republican pickup: Alaska, Arkansas and Louisiana.
4 are tossups or leaning Dem: Colorado, Iowa, New Hampshire, North Carolina, but all are favoring the Dem at the moment or are using polls that could be aberrations (time will tell).
Things could change, but as of now it looks like Republicans will pick up a net of 5 seats making it a 50/50 senate. This would give Greg Orman the power to decide who gets the majority, Dems in a 50/50 Senate with Vice President Biden breaking the tie or a 51/49 Republican Senate.
Things could change, but as of now it looks like Republicans will pick up a net of 5 seats making it a 50/50 senate. This would give Greg Orman the power to decide who gets the majority, Dems in a 50/50 Senate with Vice President Biden breaking the tie or a 51/49 Republican Senate.
Sunday, March 30, 2014
Global Warming Thoughts
I am still on the fence on this issue. Is the Earth warming? If it is are Humans causing it? I don't know. But there are more questions that need to be asked: If the Earth is getting warmer and Humans are causing it can we do anything about it? And if so what?
Although I am still on the fence I do have some firm opinions about global warming:
1. Both sides are firmly entrenched and many simply will not listen to the other.
2. Both sides repeat things that simply are not true:
a. The pro side: things like the seas will rise 20 feet.
b. The con side: things like volcanoes emit more greenhouse gases than Humans.
3. The left is using the issue for political purposes. They are using it to pass new government controls over the economy they would want to pass even if the issue of global warming did not exist.
4. If global warming is real, it is caused by Humans and we can do something about it the left does not have the right solutions.
More government control is rarely the answer, it is often the problem. The solutions to this problem, if there is a problem, will for the most part be found in the private sector. I'm not saying there is no place at all for regulation in controlling pollution, just that it has far too big a role at present and that what regulation we do need should be smarter as well as less intrusive.
The right needs to get involved on this issue with more than just a naysayer's role. What free market ways can we reduce humanity's carbon footprint? What innovations are there waiting to be invented that could reduce the amount of CO2 that gets in the air? Even if only to take this issue away from the left we should find out.
Facts:
1. Humans emit 31.32 billion tons of CO2 a year.
2. America is responsible for 5.433 billion tons of these emissions.
3. China is responsible for 8.286 billion tons of these emissions.
4. India is responsible for 2.008 billion tons of these emissions.
5. Volcanoes emit about 65-319 million tons of CO2 a year, far less than Humans.
6. An acre of forest takes in 30,000 pounds of CO2 and releases 22,000 pounds of oxygen into the air.
7. There are currently 9.6 billion acres of trees, which cover 29.6% of the Earth's land.
8. The atmosphere (as of 2014) has 397 parts per million CO2.
Although I am still on the fence I do have some firm opinions about global warming:
1. Both sides are firmly entrenched and many simply will not listen to the other.
2. Both sides repeat things that simply are not true:
a. The pro side: things like the seas will rise 20 feet.
b. The con side: things like volcanoes emit more greenhouse gases than Humans.
3. The left is using the issue for political purposes. They are using it to pass new government controls over the economy they would want to pass even if the issue of global warming did not exist.
4. If global warming is real, it is caused by Humans and we can do something about it the left does not have the right solutions.
More government control is rarely the answer, it is often the problem. The solutions to this problem, if there is a problem, will for the most part be found in the private sector. I'm not saying there is no place at all for regulation in controlling pollution, just that it has far too big a role at present and that what regulation we do need should be smarter as well as less intrusive.
The right needs to get involved on this issue with more than just a naysayer's role. What free market ways can we reduce humanity's carbon footprint? What innovations are there waiting to be invented that could reduce the amount of CO2 that gets in the air? Even if only to take this issue away from the left we should find out.
Facts:
1. Humans emit 31.32 billion tons of CO2 a year.
2. America is responsible for 5.433 billion tons of these emissions.
3. China is responsible for 8.286 billion tons of these emissions.
4. India is responsible for 2.008 billion tons of these emissions.
5. Volcanoes emit about 65-319 million tons of CO2 a year, far less than Humans.
6. An acre of forest takes in 30,000 pounds of CO2 and releases 22,000 pounds of oxygen into the air.
7. There are currently 9.6 billion acres of trees, which cover 29.6% of the Earth's land.
8. The atmosphere (as of 2014) has 397 parts per million CO2.
Thursday, May 16, 2013
Benghazi Investigation Thoughts
It is clear that there were warnings about terrorism months in advance and they were ignored, it is clear that troops were ordered to stand down when they could have gone to the rescue, and it is clear that the talking points were severely manipulated by the White House and State Department.
We were lied to about the reasons for the attack, we were told it was a mob action in reaction to an anti-Islam video, and the creator of that video was arrested and is still in jail.
But we don't know that a rescue could have saved any lives, maybe it could and maybe it couldn't, and we don't know who knew what and when.
But it is beyond any reasonable dispute that we need answers.
But sadly politics has crept into this, and we probably shouldn't be surprised. Democrats have been demagoging the investigation, carrying the administration's water and denouncing any attempt to find the truth a "Partisan witch-hunt." And some Republicans have begun to use the "I" word, "Impeachment."
Both these extremes should be rejected. Republicans should drop all talk of impeachment immediately, this is not something that should be taken lightly and it is never something to be excited about. Whatever you think about President Obama he is the President and we should all hope he serves out his full term in office, it is never good for the country when a President is forced to leave office before is term is over, no matter what you think of the man or his policies.
And Democrats need to stop shilling for Obama and Hillary and start looking for the truth wherever it takes us. This is a serious issue, not a non-story as some partisan hacks on the left have tried to paint it. People died and we were not told the truth and we deserve to know why.
We were lied to about the reasons for the attack, we were told it was a mob action in reaction to an anti-Islam video, and the creator of that video was arrested and is still in jail.
But we don't know that a rescue could have saved any lives, maybe it could and maybe it couldn't, and we don't know who knew what and when.
But it is beyond any reasonable dispute that we need answers.
But sadly politics has crept into this, and we probably shouldn't be surprised. Democrats have been demagoging the investigation, carrying the administration's water and denouncing any attempt to find the truth a "Partisan witch-hunt." And some Republicans have begun to use the "I" word, "Impeachment."
Both these extremes should be rejected. Republicans should drop all talk of impeachment immediately, this is not something that should be taken lightly and it is never something to be excited about. Whatever you think about President Obama he is the President and we should all hope he serves out his full term in office, it is never good for the country when a President is forced to leave office before is term is over, no matter what you think of the man or his policies.
And Democrats need to stop shilling for Obama and Hillary and start looking for the truth wherever it takes us. This is a serious issue, not a non-story as some partisan hacks on the left have tried to paint it. People died and we were not told the truth and we deserve to know why.
Sunday, May 5, 2013
Republican Voters Need to Get a Clue
After a long string of losses that should have been victories in the last few years yet another election is likely to be handed to the Democrats, a special election of a heavily Republican seat in South Carolina. The Republican candidate is disgraced Former Governor of South Carolina Mark Sanford.
He is running against Elizabeth Colbert Busch and nearly every poll has him behind is a seat that should have been an easy landslide win for any Republican with little need for money even being spent on a campaign.
Who is to blame for this? Is it the liberal media? No. The blame on this one rest completely in the hands of Republican primary voters who nominated him. He joins a long line of deeply flawed candidates who were just plain out of touch, like Sharon Angle, Christine O'Donnell, Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock. Now Sanford's problem is ethical and not that he's on the fringe like these other candidates.
But it shows a tone deafness in Republican voters who only realize their mistake after they've thrown the election away.
Even if Sanford somehow squeaks out a small victory, possible, but according to the polls (which despite Republican cries of skewed polls were accurate last year) Sanford is headed for defeat, he will still face another tough race in 2014 and will be a distraction for Republicans in congress.
If Republicans want to win elections they need to choose better candidates. And, no, that is not a code word for nominating wishy washy moderates who won't rock the boat, conservatives like Marco Rubio, Pat Toomey, and Ron Johnson have shown the right conservatives can win even in Purple and nominal Blue states. These people knew how to connect with voters and not alienate them. And that's what we need, and we need it badly.
He is running against Elizabeth Colbert Busch and nearly every poll has him behind is a seat that should have been an easy landslide win for any Republican with little need for money even being spent on a campaign.
Who is to blame for this? Is it the liberal media? No. The blame on this one rest completely in the hands of Republican primary voters who nominated him. He joins a long line of deeply flawed candidates who were just plain out of touch, like Sharon Angle, Christine O'Donnell, Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock. Now Sanford's problem is ethical and not that he's on the fringe like these other candidates.
But it shows a tone deafness in Republican voters who only realize their mistake after they've thrown the election away.
Even if Sanford somehow squeaks out a small victory, possible, but according to the polls (which despite Republican cries of skewed polls were accurate last year) Sanford is headed for defeat, he will still face another tough race in 2014 and will be a distraction for Republicans in congress.
If Republicans want to win elections they need to choose better candidates. And, no, that is not a code word for nominating wishy washy moderates who won't rock the boat, conservatives like Marco Rubio, Pat Toomey, and Ron Johnson have shown the right conservatives can win even in Purple and nominal Blue states. These people knew how to connect with voters and not alienate them. And that's what we need, and we need it badly.
Sunday, December 9, 2012
Fiscal Cliff Thoughts
With the fiscal cliff approaching and no sign of a deal it is time for Republicans to come up with a new strategy. They want to bring in new revenue by getting rid of deductions, but leaving rates the same, and cut spending. Obama wants to bring in new revenue by raising rates to the pre-Bush Tax Cut levels, plus add a lot more revenue, which would mean either higher rates than the pre-Bush Tax Cut levels, removing some deductions, or both. But instead of cutting spending Obama wants to raise spending with a new stimulus, even though previous ones failed to generate growth to the economy. Not only if the President willing to meet the Republicans half-way, he is giving them less than nothing. But with the media openly shilling for the Democrats and Republicans in disarray public opinion is on the Democrats' side, it doesn't help that the public does not know how unwilling to compromise the President is.
So, it is time for a new strategy.
In fairness, Obama won the election, albeit narrowly, so Republicans should give up the tax cuts. Let the rates for the top 2% expire and come up with a couple deductions that would only affect top income earners and get rid of them. Announce it in the press and make sure the message gets out. If conservative complain tell them "We don't like it but compromise has to start somewhere," and add, "If more of you had come out and voted we wouldn't be in this situation."
I don't like letting the tax cuts expire, I think we need further tax cuts, but elections have consequences.
However, Republicans did hold the House by more than a slim margin. So after Republicans give in on taxes, tell the President it is time to cut spending. Ask the President for his proposal for spending cuts and make it know immediate cuts are required, because we all know from experience the promise of future cuts will not be honored.
I know we can't balance the budget in one year, but more than token cuts will have to be part of the deal. Hundreds of billions of cuts must be made in the first year. The President won the election but he did not win the House so he will have to give in some as well.
Republicans must make it known they are willing to compromise, and further, make it known to the voters that as of yet, President Obama isn't.
And if they want to get their tax cuts back, they will have to win an election.
So, it is time for a new strategy.
In fairness, Obama won the election, albeit narrowly, so Republicans should give up the tax cuts. Let the rates for the top 2% expire and come up with a couple deductions that would only affect top income earners and get rid of them. Announce it in the press and make sure the message gets out. If conservative complain tell them "We don't like it but compromise has to start somewhere," and add, "If more of you had come out and voted we wouldn't be in this situation."
I don't like letting the tax cuts expire, I think we need further tax cuts, but elections have consequences.
However, Republicans did hold the House by more than a slim margin. So after Republicans give in on taxes, tell the President it is time to cut spending. Ask the President for his proposal for spending cuts and make it know immediate cuts are required, because we all know from experience the promise of future cuts will not be honored.
I know we can't balance the budget in one year, but more than token cuts will have to be part of the deal. Hundreds of billions of cuts must be made in the first year. The President won the election but he did not win the House so he will have to give in some as well.
Republicans must make it known they are willing to compromise, and further, make it known to the voters that as of yet, President Obama isn't.
And if they want to get their tax cuts back, they will have to win an election.
Thursday, November 8, 2012
Illegal Immigration Questions
One of the main groups that helped reelect President Obama was Hispanics. This has led for calls by some for Republicans to rethink their policies on illegal immigration. And rethinking the rhetoric some use on illegal immigration and possibly some policies on the margins should be considered.
But some questions need to be asked. Let's say we grant another amnesty to all illegal immigrants currently in the country. They are now legal. What happens to illegals who come after the amnesty is granted? Would we finally enforce the law? Or would we just let it slide again for several years until to pro-illegal lobby calls for another amnesty? Would we even secure our borders?
We had these promises before the last amnesty. Enforcement was promised. Border security was promised. Both were delayed and then dropped when public attention drifted away.
Wouldn't this just happen again?
But some questions need to be asked. Let's say we grant another amnesty to all illegal immigrants currently in the country. They are now legal. What happens to illegals who come after the amnesty is granted? Would we finally enforce the law? Or would we just let it slide again for several years until to pro-illegal lobby calls for another amnesty? Would we even secure our borders?
We had these promises before the last amnesty. Enforcement was promised. Border security was promised. Both were delayed and then dropped when public attention drifted away.
Wouldn't this just happen again?
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Three States Vote for Same-Sex marriage
For the first time voters approved measures to legalize same-sex marriage in America. Voters in Maryland, Maine, and Washington passed laws legalizing same-sex marriage while voters in Minnesota rejected a proposition to ban it.
I can't stress how big this is, and from my perspective, positive. I have no personal stake in this, I am heterosexual, but I support same-sex marriage because there is no real reason to oppose it. Gay marriage will not erode the institution of marriage, it will simply change it. Two men or two women in a loving relationship that is now recognized by the government will not make the marriages of opposite-sex couples any less meaningful.
I am still very disappointed by the results of the Presidential election. I disagree with the Mitt Romney's stance on same-sex marriage, but I still believe he was the best choice to lead America over the next four years.
But this is a bright spot in an otherwise dim election, at least from my perspective. I hope this encourages the movement to pass measures in other states until we have marriage equality everywhere.
I can't stress how big this is, and from my perspective, positive. I have no personal stake in this, I am heterosexual, but I support same-sex marriage because there is no real reason to oppose it. Gay marriage will not erode the institution of marriage, it will simply change it. Two men or two women in a loving relationship that is now recognized by the government will not make the marriages of opposite-sex couples any less meaningful.
I am still very disappointed by the results of the Presidential election. I disagree with the Mitt Romney's stance on same-sex marriage, but I still believe he was the best choice to lead America over the next four years.
But this is a bright spot in an otherwise dim election, at least from my perspective. I hope this encourages the movement to pass measures in other states until we have marriage equality everywhere.
2012 Election Post Mortem
Election 2012 is behind us and now begins the task of dissecting it. President Obama won reelection. He won the popular vote narrowly and the electoral college much more comfortably. Democrats kept their senate majority easily with 55 seats to Republicans 45, a gain of 2. But Republicans held the house with seats to spare, taking at least 233 seats to Democrats 194 so far, a net gain of 9 seats for the Democrats if they win all the seats yet to be declared.
As polls declared Obama regaining momentum in the past few days many conservatives declared the polls were wrong, saying these they were based on flawed turnout models and that Romney would have at least a few more points than they declared. Some, like Dick Morris even said Romney would win in an electoral landslide.
But the polls were right, the turnout models were accurate and Romney could not reach 270 electoral votes.
So how did Obama win? It looks like Obama repeated the turnout model of 2008. If this model is permanent it bodes ill for the future of our nation.
In Obama's first term he delivered four years of deficits over $1 trillion, added $6 trillion to the debt and left unemployment at 7.9%, with real unemployment well over 10%. To add to that, under his watch America's credit rating was downgraded for the first time in history, not once, but twice.
What will a second Obama term look like? For at least 2 years Republicans have the House, so they can stop new regulations that would kill business, like another Obamacare type bill: Card Check for example.
But Obama will let the Bush tax cuts expire which means higher taxes, and despite his conciliatory tone in his victory speech he will not reach across the isle. And he will not cut spending, he had a chance to do that and didn't with the debt ceiling showdown. So we could see the debt reach $20-22 trillion in the next four years. We very well could see at least one more credit downgrade in the next four years.
There is also the possibility that a conservative justice could retire sending the courts far to the left.
On the international front countries like Russia and China will get whatever they want, even if it is catastrophic to our national security, and Iran may get its nukes.
The worst part of this is if the new turnout model is permanent it will have to get a whole lot worse for a Republican to win in 2016. America will be weaker economically and militarily. We may well see the beginning of the end of America as a superpower.
As polls declared Obama regaining momentum in the past few days many conservatives declared the polls were wrong, saying these they were based on flawed turnout models and that Romney would have at least a few more points than they declared. Some, like Dick Morris even said Romney would win in an electoral landslide.
But the polls were right, the turnout models were accurate and Romney could not reach 270 electoral votes.
So how did Obama win? It looks like Obama repeated the turnout model of 2008. If this model is permanent it bodes ill for the future of our nation.
In Obama's first term he delivered four years of deficits over $1 trillion, added $6 trillion to the debt and left unemployment at 7.9%, with real unemployment well over 10%. To add to that, under his watch America's credit rating was downgraded for the first time in history, not once, but twice.
What will a second Obama term look like? For at least 2 years Republicans have the House, so they can stop new regulations that would kill business, like another Obamacare type bill: Card Check for example.
But Obama will let the Bush tax cuts expire which means higher taxes, and despite his conciliatory tone in his victory speech he will not reach across the isle. And he will not cut spending, he had a chance to do that and didn't with the debt ceiling showdown. So we could see the debt reach $20-22 trillion in the next four years. We very well could see at least one more credit downgrade in the next four years.
There is also the possibility that a conservative justice could retire sending the courts far to the left.
On the international front countries like Russia and China will get whatever they want, even if it is catastrophic to our national security, and Iran may get its nukes.
The worst part of this is if the new turnout model is permanent it will have to get a whole lot worse for a Republican to win in 2016. America will be weaker economically and militarily. We may well see the beginning of the end of America as a superpower.
Monday, November 5, 2012
Final Election Day Predictions and Musings
This election has had many twists and turns, both candidates have had their ups and downs but tomorrow it's over. Romney has made his mistakes but he has run a pretty good campaign, and Obama's angry and small rhetoric feel like the desperate gasps of a losing campaign.
But after being behind for weeks after his dismal performance in the first debate momentum has returned to Obama. Romney's momentum was ending even before Hurricane Sandy but now Obama has the wind at his back. But I don't think it can be entirely be explained by the hurricane. He seems to have some unexplainable way of staying in this race despite his dismal presidency.
Obama's reckless spending added 6 trillion to the debt and we have four years of deficits over $1 trillion, America's credit rating has also been downgraded for the first time in history, and not just once, but twice. To add to that the economy is stuck hovering at just below 8% unemployment and real unemployment is well above 10%. But he is still in the race and I can't explain it.
Romney has done his best to expose the president's record and offer an alternative. He offers hope when Obama offers class-warfare and anger, and yet I believe Obama will ultimately win the election.
The President leads or ties in most polls narrowly, with outliers Gallup and Rasmussen giving Romney a 1-point lead. But state polls look dismal for Romney. Obama leads in Ohio, Iowa, New Hampshire, Colorado, but some have him up in Virginia slightly. Some polls are putting Romney up in Florida, but even if he carrys it he needs more to win.
Romney will almost certainly carry all the McCain states, plus Indiana, most likely North Carolina, possibly Virginia and Florida but Ohio looks perpetually out of reach, although some polls have it close or tied. But even if he won them all he would still need another state, because he would be a few electoral votes shy of 270.
So my prediction is Obama narrowly wins both the popular vote and the electoral college, Democrats hold the Senate plus or minus a seat and Republicans hold the House. This bodes ill for bipartisanship, which the President Obama shows no interest in, but it will mean extreme far-left legislation like Card Check would go nowhere, and any attempt to push another Obamacare-like bill would never pass the House.
I could be wrong, the polls might be wrong and Romney could win, but I doubt it. If the polls are right and Obama wins it will mean that a conservative agenda even in the face of all the problems of Obama's presidency has been rejected. Could America have shifted to a center-right country to a liberal country without anyone knowing it? It's hard to say because polls also show Romney is still trusted more on economic issues and yet he is still behind.
And I can't explain it, I would be very interested to see the election post mortem for anwsers.
But after being behind for weeks after his dismal performance in the first debate momentum has returned to Obama. Romney's momentum was ending even before Hurricane Sandy but now Obama has the wind at his back. But I don't think it can be entirely be explained by the hurricane. He seems to have some unexplainable way of staying in this race despite his dismal presidency.
Obama's reckless spending added 6 trillion to the debt and we have four years of deficits over $1 trillion, America's credit rating has also been downgraded for the first time in history, and not just once, but twice. To add to that the economy is stuck hovering at just below 8% unemployment and real unemployment is well above 10%. But he is still in the race and I can't explain it.
Romney has done his best to expose the president's record and offer an alternative. He offers hope when Obama offers class-warfare and anger, and yet I believe Obama will ultimately win the election.
The President leads or ties in most polls narrowly, with outliers Gallup and Rasmussen giving Romney a 1-point lead. But state polls look dismal for Romney. Obama leads in Ohio, Iowa, New Hampshire, Colorado, but some have him up in Virginia slightly. Some polls are putting Romney up in Florida, but even if he carrys it he needs more to win.
Romney will almost certainly carry all the McCain states, plus Indiana, most likely North Carolina, possibly Virginia and Florida but Ohio looks perpetually out of reach, although some polls have it close or tied. But even if he won them all he would still need another state, because he would be a few electoral votes shy of 270.
So my prediction is Obama narrowly wins both the popular vote and the electoral college, Democrats hold the Senate plus or minus a seat and Republicans hold the House. This bodes ill for bipartisanship, which the President Obama shows no interest in, but it will mean extreme far-left legislation like Card Check would go nowhere, and any attempt to push another Obamacare-like bill would never pass the House.
I could be wrong, the polls might be wrong and Romney could win, but I doubt it. If the polls are right and Obama wins it will mean that a conservative agenda even in the face of all the problems of Obama's presidency has been rejected. Could America have shifted to a center-right country to a liberal country without anyone knowing it? It's hard to say because polls also show Romney is still trusted more on economic issues and yet he is still behind.
And I can't explain it, I would be very interested to see the election post mortem for anwsers.
Saturday, August 18, 2012
One Week Later...
It has been one week since Romney names Paul Ryan as his running mate and here are my impressions. He is an incredible campaigner that has the potential to attract independent voters as well as some Democrats. He is charismatic and is an articulate spokesman for conservatism. He has given new energy not just to the Romney Campaign, but to Romney himself.
It is still early and neither side has been able to define Ryan. but whoever is successful in doing so will probably win in November. The Obama Campaign will try to paint Ryan as a radical who will destroy medicare to pay for tax cuts for the rich, something very far from the truth. The Romney Campaign will try to define Ryan as a conservative reformer trying to rein in big government. This is true, and Ryan has the battle scars to prove it. When the Democrats were in charge with huge majorities in 2009-10 he did try to reach out to Obama but was rebuffed and even singled out for attack at an event the President invited him to.
But the Romney/Ryan ticket does have some problems: they are short on specifics and seem to be unwilling to provide them.
What tax loopholes will they close? We don't need to know them all, but a couple would be nice. Is Ryan's medicare plan the same Romney will implement? I understand that even if it is Romney might want to tweak it around the edges but at least tell us that. What specifics do they have to start to bring down the deficit? We don't need to know everything but some specifics would help. End waste fraud and abuse? Great but we need more than that.
They have the potential to win big in November but they will need to be bolder, they will have to tread that careful minefield between bold and inspiring and radical without stepping over the line. But cautious will not give them a big victory, in fact it might just deny then victory.
There is reason for conservatives to be excited, but we will need more than just exciting campaigning and great speeches.
It is still early and neither side has been able to define Ryan. but whoever is successful in doing so will probably win in November. The Obama Campaign will try to paint Ryan as a radical who will destroy medicare to pay for tax cuts for the rich, something very far from the truth. The Romney Campaign will try to define Ryan as a conservative reformer trying to rein in big government. This is true, and Ryan has the battle scars to prove it. When the Democrats were in charge with huge majorities in 2009-10 he did try to reach out to Obama but was rebuffed and even singled out for attack at an event the President invited him to.
But the Romney/Ryan ticket does have some problems: they are short on specifics and seem to be unwilling to provide them.
What tax loopholes will they close? We don't need to know them all, but a couple would be nice. Is Ryan's medicare plan the same Romney will implement? I understand that even if it is Romney might want to tweak it around the edges but at least tell us that. What specifics do they have to start to bring down the deficit? We don't need to know everything but some specifics would help. End waste fraud and abuse? Great but we need more than that.
They have the potential to win big in November but they will need to be bolder, they will have to tread that careful minefield between bold and inspiring and radical without stepping over the line. But cautious will not give them a big victory, in fact it might just deny then victory.
There is reason for conservatives to be excited, but we will need more than just exciting campaigning and great speeches.
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
Reality Check: The Bush Tax Cuts
The left rails against the Bush tax cuts for high income Americans but what they won't tell you is that letting them expire will only bring in $680 billion over the next 10 years: or about $68 billion a year. This number comes from liberals who want them to expire.
The deficit is well over $1 trillion dollars, $1.299 trillion in 2011 according to the Treasury department. So even if you let the Bush tax cuts expire you still have a deficit of over a trillion dollars. When does the rest come from? Do you honestly think the Democrats will agree to cut that much in spending? Moreover do you think they don't have new spending ideas that will eat up at least another $68 billion?
Letting the Bush tax cuts expire will go to new spending and we'll have taken even more money out of the private sector that could have gone to expanding businesses that would have given us jobs. Or worse, businesses will have to cut their workforce to pay for the new taxes Obama wants.
If the Democrats are serious about cutting the deficit let them bring up letting the tax cuts expire when the deficit is less than $68 billion.
The deficit is well over $1 trillion dollars, $1.299 trillion in 2011 according to the Treasury department. So even if you let the Bush tax cuts expire you still have a deficit of over a trillion dollars. When does the rest come from? Do you honestly think the Democrats will agree to cut that much in spending? Moreover do you think they don't have new spending ideas that will eat up at least another $68 billion?
Letting the Bush tax cuts expire will go to new spending and we'll have taken even more money out of the private sector that could have gone to expanding businesses that would have given us jobs. Or worse, businesses will have to cut their workforce to pay for the new taxes Obama wants.
If the Democrats are serious about cutting the deficit let them bring up letting the tax cuts expire when the deficit is less than $68 billion.
Saturday, August 11, 2012
Romney to Name VP Today
Late last night it was announced that Mitt Romney would name his running mate Saturday morning in Virginia at 9 AM Eastern (6 AM Pacific). Soon after that sources started to leak that it was Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan. More and more sources have come out to confirm this so it is almost certainly true, of course we won't be 100% certain until this morning.
Assuming it is Ryan this is an unquestionably bold pick that will be remembered as either pure genius or utter folly.
This choice will excite budget hawks who have decried deficits for years, but it will also excite the left who is opposed to any fiscal restraint. The attacks will be predictable and relentless: Romney/Ryan wants to throw seniors in the streets, they want to slash vital services for the poor, if they win old people will die because they won't get the medical services they need.
These attacks were going to come in one for or another anyway, but they will be more intense with Ryan on the ticket. So I can see the wisdom in choosing Ryan and facing the attacks head on. Romney and Ryan will have to be bold, not timid. They can't wince at the attacks coming. They need to defend the Ryan plan with all their energy and tell the voters why we need it.
Who wins this election will be determined by who is more effective in persuading the voters which vision is better for America: fiscal restraint, low taxes, and more regulation; or more spending, tax hikes and more regulation.
Romney's choice of Ryan will be a defining point of the campaign. It will be the choice that sealed his political defeat, or a choice that made his victory and his Presidency possible.
Assuming it is Ryan this is an unquestionably bold pick that will be remembered as either pure genius or utter folly.
This choice will excite budget hawks who have decried deficits for years, but it will also excite the left who is opposed to any fiscal restraint. The attacks will be predictable and relentless: Romney/Ryan wants to throw seniors in the streets, they want to slash vital services for the poor, if they win old people will die because they won't get the medical services they need.
These attacks were going to come in one for or another anyway, but they will be more intense with Ryan on the ticket. So I can see the wisdom in choosing Ryan and facing the attacks head on. Romney and Ryan will have to be bold, not timid. They can't wince at the attacks coming. They need to defend the Ryan plan with all their energy and tell the voters why we need it.
Who wins this election will be determined by who is more effective in persuading the voters which vision is better for America: fiscal restraint, low taxes, and more regulation; or more spending, tax hikes and more regulation.
Romney's choice of Ryan will be a defining point of the campaign. It will be the choice that sealed his political defeat, or a choice that made his victory and his Presidency possible.
Thursday, August 9, 2012
Attacks On Romney Taking Their Toll
The Obama campaign as well as his allies have been hammering Romney relentlessly on his record at Bain Capital; accusing him of being or at the very least strongly suggesting he is an out of touch venture capitalist pirate with no regard for any but the very rich and his own pocket.
The attacks have gone largely unanswered and this is taking a toll on Romney's image.
It is not too late yet, but if the Romney campaign does not come up with a good answer to these attacks the perceptions these ads are creating will solidify in the minds of the electorate making victory in November nearly impossible.
He needs to show the real story of his work at Bain, address the failures but stress the successes. Show not just companies that are thriving because of his work but workers who have jobs. Show men and women who themselves are living the American dream because they have a job with a company saved by Bain. There must be thousands of these stories. Pick a few of the most interesting and inspiring.
Further we need to hear more about Romney's record as governor and his management skills and how all of these will come into play if he becomes our next President.
It's not too late, but if the Romney campaign doesn't write a positive narrative of Romney the only story there will be is the Obama campaign's negative one.
The attacks have gone largely unanswered and this is taking a toll on Romney's image.
It is not too late yet, but if the Romney campaign does not come up with a good answer to these attacks the perceptions these ads are creating will solidify in the minds of the electorate making victory in November nearly impossible.
He needs to show the real story of his work at Bain, address the failures but stress the successes. Show not just companies that are thriving because of his work but workers who have jobs. Show men and women who themselves are living the American dream because they have a job with a company saved by Bain. There must be thousands of these stories. Pick a few of the most interesting and inspiring.
Further we need to hear more about Romney's record as governor and his management skills and how all of these will come into play if he becomes our next President.
It's not too late, but if the Romney campaign doesn't write a positive narrative of Romney the only story there will be is the Obama campaign's negative one.
Thursday, June 28, 2012
Attorney General Eric Holder Held in Contempt of Congress with Bipartisan Vote
In a bipartisan vote Eric Holder was held in contempt of congress by a vote of 255-67. Over 100 Democrats decided not to vote at all and simply walked out of the House in protest, but 17 Democrats voted with Republicans to hold Holder in contempt.
This whole situation is regrettable. It is never a good day when a member of the President's cabinet is held in contempt of congress, but there was little choice. Despite Democrats' insistence that thousands of documents have been turned over, many more are being withheld, and these documents need to be turned over to shed light on Fast and Furious, which has led to the death of Boarder Patrol Agent Brian Terry. This is serious business and not to be politicized.
No one should cheer the contempt vote, just accept that it had to happen and could have been avoided altogether if the Attorney General complied with requests of congress.
This whole situation is regrettable. It is never a good day when a member of the President's cabinet is held in contempt of congress, but there was little choice. Despite Democrats' insistence that thousands of documents have been turned over, many more are being withheld, and these documents need to be turned over to shed light on Fast and Furious, which has led to the death of Boarder Patrol Agent Brian Terry. This is serious business and not to be politicized.
No one should cheer the contempt vote, just accept that it had to happen and could have been avoided altogether if the Attorney General complied with requests of congress.
Supreme Court Upholds Obamacare (Mostly)
In a 5-4 decision the Supreme Court upheld the individual mandate, but it ruled that a mandate using the commerce clause is unconstitutional. Instead the mandate was upheld as a tax, something that President Obama repeatedly denied it was until it went to the Supreme Court, then his Solicitor General argued that it was a tax. Chief Justice John Roberts, a George W. Bush appointee sided with liberals giving them the votes they needed to uphold the mandate.
The court also ruled that the Federal government could not take away current medicaid funding from states that choose not to participate in The Affordable Care Act's (Obamacare) new requirements.
I applaud the latter ruling while strongly disagreeing with the former. The Supreme Court have now ruled that there is no limit to the coercion that the government can use by it's taxing power to control the lives of individuals. It is now more important than ever to defeat President Obama and elect a Republican Senate as well as hold a solid majority in the House.
The court also ruled that the Federal government could not take away current medicaid funding from states that choose not to participate in The Affordable Care Act's (Obamacare) new requirements.
I applaud the latter ruling while strongly disagreeing with the former. The Supreme Court have now ruled that there is no limit to the coercion that the government can use by it's taxing power to control the lives of individuals. It is now more important than ever to defeat President Obama and elect a Republican Senate as well as hold a solid majority in the House.
Sunday, May 13, 2012
Romney's Electoral Path to Victory
Romney only needs 6 Obama states to win, or six states and the rest of another McCain lost part of in 2008:
1. Indiana- 11
2. North Carolina- 15
3. Virginia- 13
4. Florida- 29
5. Ohio- 18
And one of these:
6. Nevada- 6
6. Iowa- 6
McCain lost one district in Nebraska giving one of it's electoral votes to Obama.
If Romney wins all of Nebraska's electoral votes this year he can also win with the first five states plus New Hampshire, otherwise it would be a 269/269 tie in the electoral college.
1. Indiana (11)- This state is already considered gone for Obama.
2. North Carolina (15)- Obama won this state by .3% in 2008 at the height of Hope and Change, some polls have put it close with a narrow lead for Obama but he is unlikely to carry it again unless Romney stumbles badly.
3. Virginia (13)- For now Obama has a slight advantage but Romney has a good chance of carrying the state, but if Obama is reelected it could well come down to Virginia.
4. Florida (29)- Obama carried it by less than 3%, Obama and Romney are trading narrow leads but Obama is consistently under 50%. Romney has a good shot of winning it.
5. Ohio (18)- Obama carried it by less than 5% in 2008. The economy is bad there and Obama is under 50% with a small lead or trailing slightly. It will be tougher than Florida but it is winnable for Romney.
The Sixth State:
6a. Nevada (6)- Obama carried this state by 12.5% last time and has a small lead and is over 50% in most polls but unemployment is high in that state and has the potential to make that state competitive.
6b. Iowa (6)- In 2008 Obama carried the state by 9.5% but this year are split, some have Obama leading, others show a small lead for Romney.
6c. New Hampshire (4)- Obama took this state by 9.65% points in 2008 but just like Iowa polls this year are split, anywhere from +9 Obama to +2 Romney. For now I would say Obama has the advantage but that could change.
6d. Colorado (9)- This state was won by the President by 9% in 2008 and Obama has the lead in most if not all polls, for now the advantage is his but some of the polls have him under 50% so Romney's people best keep an eye on the possibility of taking it.
Longer Shots
6e. Wisconsin (10)- This was a 14-point win in 2008 but in 2010 Republicans defeated longtime Democratic Senator Russ Feingold, picked up the Governorship and won both houses of the state legislature. Democrats fought back hard against Republicans and came close to winning back the State Senate in recalls last year, Governor Scott Walker is now in the middle of a recall election of his own that will be decided June 5th. If he loses it will likely be a lost cause for Romney in November, if he wins handily it could well be a state Romney can win. For now however, Obama has the upper hand.
6f. Minnesota (10)- Like Wisconsin this state is slowly trending Republican. Obama won it by more than 10-points in 2008 but Republicans picked up both houses of the state legislature in 2010 and barely lost the governorship in a 3-way race where the conservative vote was divided. Obama is leading, but is below 50% in some polls. A prospect for Romney to win, but for now advantage Obama.
Obama's Firewall
First, ignore Indiana and North Carolina, since he is not going to win them anyway. Then to win re-election all Obama has to do is win Virginia, Ohio and one of the other states I mentioned, Colorado for example. If that were to happen Obama win have 278 votes in the Electoral College to Romney's 260, thus winning a 2nd term.
To make it brief, he who wins Virginia and Ohio has the best shot at victory.
1. Indiana- 11
2. North Carolina- 15
3. Virginia- 13
4. Florida- 29
5. Ohio- 18
And one of these:
6. Nevada- 6
6. Iowa- 6
McCain lost one district in Nebraska giving one of it's electoral votes to Obama.
If Romney wins all of Nebraska's electoral votes this year he can also win with the first five states plus New Hampshire, otherwise it would be a 269/269 tie in the electoral college.
1. Indiana (11)- This state is already considered gone for Obama.
2. North Carolina (15)- Obama won this state by .3% in 2008 at the height of Hope and Change, some polls have put it close with a narrow lead for Obama but he is unlikely to carry it again unless Romney stumbles badly.
3. Virginia (13)- For now Obama has a slight advantage but Romney has a good chance of carrying the state, but if Obama is reelected it could well come down to Virginia.
4. Florida (29)- Obama carried it by less than 3%, Obama and Romney are trading narrow leads but Obama is consistently under 50%. Romney has a good shot of winning it.
5. Ohio (18)- Obama carried it by less than 5% in 2008. The economy is bad there and Obama is under 50% with a small lead or trailing slightly. It will be tougher than Florida but it is winnable for Romney.
The Sixth State:
6a. Nevada (6)- Obama carried this state by 12.5% last time and has a small lead and is over 50% in most polls but unemployment is high in that state and has the potential to make that state competitive.
6b. Iowa (6)- In 2008 Obama carried the state by 9.5% but this year are split, some have Obama leading, others show a small lead for Romney.
6c. New Hampshire (4)- Obama took this state by 9.65% points in 2008 but just like Iowa polls this year are split, anywhere from +9 Obama to +2 Romney. For now I would say Obama has the advantage but that could change.
6d. Colorado (9)- This state was won by the President by 9% in 2008 and Obama has the lead in most if not all polls, for now the advantage is his but some of the polls have him under 50% so Romney's people best keep an eye on the possibility of taking it.
Longer Shots
6e. Wisconsin (10)- This was a 14-point win in 2008 but in 2010 Republicans defeated longtime Democratic Senator Russ Feingold, picked up the Governorship and won both houses of the state legislature. Democrats fought back hard against Republicans and came close to winning back the State Senate in recalls last year, Governor Scott Walker is now in the middle of a recall election of his own that will be decided June 5th. If he loses it will likely be a lost cause for Romney in November, if he wins handily it could well be a state Romney can win. For now however, Obama has the upper hand.
6f. Minnesota (10)- Like Wisconsin this state is slowly trending Republican. Obama won it by more than 10-points in 2008 but Republicans picked up both houses of the state legislature in 2010 and barely lost the governorship in a 3-way race where the conservative vote was divided. Obama is leading, but is below 50% in some polls. A prospect for Romney to win, but for now advantage Obama.
Obama's Firewall
First, ignore Indiana and North Carolina, since he is not going to win them anyway. Then to win re-election all Obama has to do is win Virginia, Ohio and one of the other states I mentioned, Colorado for example. If that were to happen Obama win have 278 votes in the Electoral College to Romney's 260, thus winning a 2nd term.
To make it brief, he who wins Virginia and Ohio has the best shot at victory.
Thursday, May 10, 2012
Obama Now Supports Same-Sex Marriage, Again
Yesterday President Obama finally came out in favor of same-sex marriage. But he had supported it before.
Andrew Kaczynski at Buzzfeed has a more in depth timeline with videos posted as well.
Obama Gay Marriage Timeline
In 1996 he was running for a very liberal State Senate seat in Illinois. No Republican was going to be elected, his concern was other Democrats in the Primary: So he supported it.
In 2004 he was going statewide, so it was a riskier position to have: So he opposed it.
In 2008 he was running for President, and the majority of Americans were against same-sex marriage at the time: So he was still against it.
Now in 2012 polls have show a narrow plurality to a narrow majority supporting it, and he knows he won't carry states that oppose it that he carried last time, ones like Indiana and North Carolina: So he supports it.
The President has said that he supports states being able to make the decision on same-sex marriage (which happens to be my position, both in support of SSM and states having the right to legalize it or ban it). But is this his real position? I don't doubt he supports same-sex marriage, but it is possible he does not really favor states' rights in this area.
Andrew Kaczynski at Buzzfeed has a more in depth timeline with videos posted as well.
Obama Gay Marriage Timeline
Obama in 1996: "I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages."
Obama in 2004: "My religious faith dictates marriage is between a man and a woman, gay marriage is not a civil right."
Obama in 2008: "I believe marriage is the union between a man and a woman. As a Christian it's also a sacred union."
In 1996 he was running for a very liberal State Senate seat in Illinois. No Republican was going to be elected, his concern was other Democrats in the Primary: So he supported it.
In 2004 he was going statewide, so it was a riskier position to have: So he opposed it.
In 2008 he was running for President, and the majority of Americans were against same-sex marriage at the time: So he was still against it.
Now in 2012 polls have show a narrow plurality to a narrow majority supporting it, and he knows he won't carry states that oppose it that he carried last time, ones like Indiana and North Carolina: So he supports it.
The President has said that he supports states being able to make the decision on same-sex marriage (which happens to be my position, both in support of SSM and states having the right to legalize it or ban it). But is this his real position? I don't doubt he supports same-sex marriage, but it is possible he does not really favor states' rights in this area.
Friday, May 4, 2012
Mitt has the Nomination All but Won, but if He Wins He Better Govern Like A Conservative
With Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich suspending their campaigns and some of Mitt Romney's rivals such as Michele Bachmann endorsing him it is safe to say Romney is the 2012 Republican Nominee for President. He may win in November, he may not.
If he wins he should be mindful of the Tea Party that is successfully defeating sitting Republican congressman and senators out in the primary with less than conservative records. In 2010 Utah Senator Bob Bennett was defeated, this year another Utah Senator has a race on his hands, Orrin Hatch. Hatch will probably win in the end but long time Indiana Senator Richard Lugar may not be so lucky. He is trailing Tea Party challenge and Indiana state Treasurer Richard Mourdock. A Mourdock victory will turn a safe Republican seat into a leaning or likely Republican seat but he is still favored to win.
This all leads to Romney and how he will govern if elected. He does not have to be a rigid ideologue to please the Tea Party as the left would have us believe, but he does have to significantly reduce the deficit and do his absolute best to get real reforms passed. Democrats will likely filibuster most reforms but Romney must try and try hard.
If the deficit is down, regulation is streamlined and conservative judges appointed he will have no contest for the Republican Nomination in 2016 if he wins in 2012. But if the deficit does not go down significantly, and no attempts at conservative reform are made there will be a primary in 2016 and he could lose.
If he wins he should be mindful of the Tea Party that is successfully defeating sitting Republican congressman and senators out in the primary with less than conservative records. In 2010 Utah Senator Bob Bennett was defeated, this year another Utah Senator has a race on his hands, Orrin Hatch. Hatch will probably win in the end but long time Indiana Senator Richard Lugar may not be so lucky. He is trailing Tea Party challenge and Indiana state Treasurer Richard Mourdock. A Mourdock victory will turn a safe Republican seat into a leaning or likely Republican seat but he is still favored to win.
This all leads to Romney and how he will govern if elected. He does not have to be a rigid ideologue to please the Tea Party as the left would have us believe, but he does have to significantly reduce the deficit and do his absolute best to get real reforms passed. Democrats will likely filibuster most reforms but Romney must try and try hard.
If the deficit is down, regulation is streamlined and conservative judges appointed he will have no contest for the Republican Nomination in 2016 if he wins in 2012. But if the deficit does not go down significantly, and no attempts at conservative reform are made there will be a primary in 2016 and he could lose.
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
Liberals, Illegal Immigration, and Their Arguments Supporting It
The hysterical, out of proportion response to the Arizona law enforcing federal immigration laws by the left demonstrates with total clarity not only how out of touch they are with the rest of the country, but also how desperate they are to support illegal immigration.
Within days of passage of the law calls for boycotts and demonstrations by the illegal immigration lobby and other far left groups sprung up around the country. These protests are highly organized astroturf protests designed to give the appearance of public disapproval of the Arizona law. But polls show overwhelming approval in Arizona and around the nation for enforcement of immigration laws. Why is the left so desperate to oppose any effort to confront the problem of illegal immigration? The answer is simple: politics.
The changing demographics in America brought about by illegal immigration will give the left ever increasing power, especially if the communities formed by illegals do not integrate into American society. The left, for all their denials and protestations, know that they are out of touch on most issues with the American public, yet they are determined to take America as far to the left as they can. So how can they take this country to where they want it to go? They must import the new majority.
Of course they cannot outright say they support illegal immigration without incurring the wrath of the electorate so they use the race card to tar and feather those who want to enforce immigration laws as racist, and frame the language of amnesty in the foggiest possible light: "A path to citizenship."
To attempt to blunt enforcement arguments directly they will paint the possibility of securing the border as hopeless and raise the strawman of deportation of every single last illegal in the nation being an equally impossible task. Yes, even if we enforce the laws on the books and get all the resources needed we will not find and deport every single last illegal in the country, but that is no reason not to enforce immigration laws. Not every armed robbery or murder will be solved, that isn't reason not to try to solve as many as possible.
Within days of passage of the law calls for boycotts and demonstrations by the illegal immigration lobby and other far left groups sprung up around the country. These protests are highly organized astroturf protests designed to give the appearance of public disapproval of the Arizona law. But polls show overwhelming approval in Arizona and around the nation for enforcement of immigration laws. Why is the left so desperate to oppose any effort to confront the problem of illegal immigration? The answer is simple: politics.
The changing demographics in America brought about by illegal immigration will give the left ever increasing power, especially if the communities formed by illegals do not integrate into American society. The left, for all their denials and protestations, know that they are out of touch on most issues with the American public, yet they are determined to take America as far to the left as they can. So how can they take this country to where they want it to go? They must import the new majority.
Of course they cannot outright say they support illegal immigration without incurring the wrath of the electorate so they use the race card to tar and feather those who want to enforce immigration laws as racist, and frame the language of amnesty in the foggiest possible light: "A path to citizenship."
To attempt to blunt enforcement arguments directly they will paint the possibility of securing the border as hopeless and raise the strawman of deportation of every single last illegal in the nation being an equally impossible task. Yes, even if we enforce the laws on the books and get all the resources needed we will not find and deport every single last illegal in the country, but that is no reason not to enforce immigration laws. Not every armed robbery or murder will be solved, that isn't reason not to try to solve as many as possible.
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
The GOP is in Serious Danger of Losing the Presidential Election
With Obama's approval rating now creeping up into the high 40s and a Republican Presidential Primary that could end up with a weak candidate, or just as bad, a brokered convention the once good chance of winning back the White House in 2012 is slipping away.
Newt Gingrich won Saturday's South Carolina Primary resoundingly in a stunning rebuke of former front runner Mitt Romney. And now Gingrich leads in Florida by double digits. And to add to that infighting and supporters for candidates loathing the opposition enough that they may not support the winner if their man isn't the Nominee are making President Obama's chances at a 2nd Term better every week.
If Gingrich nets several large states before once again falling, and Santorum does the same with Romney winning some states and showing upa strong second in others this could very well leave no candidate with a majority of delegates. This will lead to a brokered convention with candidates scrambling to make deals with rivals for delegates and a lot more bad blood than there is even now.
Furthermore the only one of the top three candidates, Romney, Gingrich, and Santorum who comes close to winning is Romney. Santorum will send independents away in droves with his heavy-handed social conservative rhetoric and Newt has enough baggage and a tendency for gaffes that will also hurt his chances if he wins the nomination.
Romney may not even win, but he has a chance. And he won't hurt House and Senate candidates down-ticket like the others. Republicans don't have long to fix the mess they are in, and the stakes couldn't be higher.
Newt Gingrich won Saturday's South Carolina Primary resoundingly in a stunning rebuke of former front runner Mitt Romney. And now Gingrich leads in Florida by double digits. And to add to that infighting and supporters for candidates loathing the opposition enough that they may not support the winner if their man isn't the Nominee are making President Obama's chances at a 2nd Term better every week.
If Gingrich nets several large states before once again falling, and Santorum does the same with Romney winning some states and showing upa strong second in others this could very well leave no candidate with a majority of delegates. This will lead to a brokered convention with candidates scrambling to make deals with rivals for delegates and a lot more bad blood than there is even now.
Furthermore the only one of the top three candidates, Romney, Gingrich, and Santorum who comes close to winning is Romney. Santorum will send independents away in droves with his heavy-handed social conservative rhetoric and Newt has enough baggage and a tendency for gaffes that will also hurt his chances if he wins the nomination.
Romney may not even win, but he has a chance. And he won't hurt House and Senate candidates down-ticket like the others. Republicans don't have long to fix the mess they are in, and the stakes couldn't be higher.
Monday, December 19, 2011
Kim Jong-il is Dead
I have no idea what this means for North Korea let alone the world. Likely his son and successor Kim Jong-un will carry on the totalitarian polices of the ghastly regime. I would love to be proven wrong in this, even some progress toward freedom is better than none, but I'm not holding my breath.
Sunday, December 18, 2011
Why Can't Republicans Come Up With A Stronger Field?
With unemployment over 8.5% and a President that is out of touch ideologically with voters you would think this election would be a cake walk for Republicans. But it isn't.
President Obama either leads, is tied with, or at worst is slightly behind every single candidate on a regular basis, the only candidate in the top tier who leads him occasionally is Mitt Romney and the lead is not impressive. Generic Republican has lead the President more or less consistently but not any of these candidates. If only Generic Republican was the nominee the GOP would be set.
All the candidates are flawed to some extent. Mitt Romney has Romneycare to answer for as well as layoffs in companies he managed, and although he has been getting better at answering these charges he will be confronted with them in the General if he gets the nomination. You can count on that. Newt Gingrich has marital infidelity, taking money from Fannie and Freddie and numerous missteps in the past against him, including appearing in a climate change ad with Nancy Pelosi. He appears to be on the decline.
Santorum and Bachmann have no appeal with the center, which will absolutely be needed to win next year. Bachmann has only a few years experience in Washington, and several years of experience in each house the Minnesota legislature combined so she will likely suffer a stature problem in the General. And Santorum lost his last election in a landslide, that should make any Republican primary voter think twice about his chances of winning a national election against an entrenched incumbent.
Next we have Rick Perry, his poor debating skills, troublesome statements on illegal immigration and George W Bush like swagger (he was Bush's Lieutenant Governor in Texas) make his prospects against an above average debater like Obama in a country that still has a hangover from the Bush years less than appealing. And need anything be said about Ron Paul? The man has no chance at the nomination, he is over 70 years old and his foreign policy positions would likely trigger a 3rd party or independent run by conservatives if somehow over all the odds he managed to capture the nod.
The only other candidate than Romney who has a decent chance of winning is Jon Huntsman. But he is nowhere in the polls and some of his statements have angered conservatives. He also, unfairly I believe, loses points for being President Obama's Ambassador to China. This really shouldn't be counted against him, anyone who can offer service to his country or his President should if it doesn't violate his personal convictions.
It's too late for latecomers so we are stuck with this field. The only comfort is that the President is still unpopular and has been far below the critical 50% an incumbent should have to feel secure against Mitt Romney the still likely, although not inevitable Republican Nominee. Because the nominee will also have an affect on House and Senate races. A strong one will carry seats for Republicans over the top and a weak one will sink the prospects of candidates who might otherwise win.
President Obama either leads, is tied with, or at worst is slightly behind every single candidate on a regular basis, the only candidate in the top tier who leads him occasionally is Mitt Romney and the lead is not impressive. Generic Republican has lead the President more or less consistently but not any of these candidates. If only Generic Republican was the nominee the GOP would be set.
All the candidates are flawed to some extent. Mitt Romney has Romneycare to answer for as well as layoffs in companies he managed, and although he has been getting better at answering these charges he will be confronted with them in the General if he gets the nomination. You can count on that. Newt Gingrich has marital infidelity, taking money from Fannie and Freddie and numerous missteps in the past against him, including appearing in a climate change ad with Nancy Pelosi. He appears to be on the decline.
Santorum and Bachmann have no appeal with the center, which will absolutely be needed to win next year. Bachmann has only a few years experience in Washington, and several years of experience in each house the Minnesota legislature combined so she will likely suffer a stature problem in the General. And Santorum lost his last election in a landslide, that should make any Republican primary voter think twice about his chances of winning a national election against an entrenched incumbent.
Next we have Rick Perry, his poor debating skills, troublesome statements on illegal immigration and George W Bush like swagger (he was Bush's Lieutenant Governor in Texas) make his prospects against an above average debater like Obama in a country that still has a hangover from the Bush years less than appealing. And need anything be said about Ron Paul? The man has no chance at the nomination, he is over 70 years old and his foreign policy positions would likely trigger a 3rd party or independent run by conservatives if somehow over all the odds he managed to capture the nod.
The only other candidate than Romney who has a decent chance of winning is Jon Huntsman. But he is nowhere in the polls and some of his statements have angered conservatives. He also, unfairly I believe, loses points for being President Obama's Ambassador to China. This really shouldn't be counted against him, anyone who can offer service to his country or his President should if it doesn't violate his personal convictions.
It's too late for latecomers so we are stuck with this field. The only comfort is that the President is still unpopular and has been far below the critical 50% an incumbent should have to feel secure against Mitt Romney the still likely, although not inevitable Republican Nominee. Because the nominee will also have an affect on House and Senate races. A strong one will carry seats for Republicans over the top and a weak one will sink the prospects of candidates who might otherwise win.
Friday, December 16, 2011
Christopher Hitchens- A Powerful Voice for Atheism: Dead at 62
Hitchens had been battling cancer for some time but it did come as a shock when I read the news that he had died.
He was one of the most intelligent and relentless critics of religion of recent memory. He had a way of destroying the arguments of the religious with a ruthless glee that made his supporters cheer and his critics howl. He was one of the main voices I listened to when I was still new to Atheism. I never knew the man, like many of his supporters I would have liked to, but also like many of his supporters I felt I knew him in a sense from his writing and his famous debates his religious opponents.
I am certain his book God is Not Great will be read for many years to come and admired and scorned as an unapologetic, take-no-prisoners argument against all religion and superstition.
Hitchens was also noted for being a steadfast supporter of the Iraq War, a position which drew criticism and sometimes contempt from the Left. But Hitchens himself never really left the Left, he may have softened from the days when he called himself a Socialist but he was never a conservative.
Even though I am firmly a creature of the Right I will miss his razor-sharp intellect and his give-'em-hell approach to taking on religion.
He was one of the most intelligent and relentless critics of religion of recent memory. He had a way of destroying the arguments of the religious with a ruthless glee that made his supporters cheer and his critics howl. He was one of the main voices I listened to when I was still new to Atheism. I never knew the man, like many of his supporters I would have liked to, but also like many of his supporters I felt I knew him in a sense from his writing and his famous debates his religious opponents.
I am certain his book God is Not Great will be read for many years to come and admired and scorned as an unapologetic, take-no-prisoners argument against all religion and superstition.
Hitchens was also noted for being a steadfast supporter of the Iraq War, a position which drew criticism and sometimes contempt from the Left. But Hitchens himself never really left the Left, he may have softened from the days when he called himself a Socialist but he was never a conservative.
Even though I am firmly a creature of the Right I will miss his razor-sharp intellect and his give-'em-hell approach to taking on religion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)