http://newsmax.com/PrintTemplate?nodeid=61852
Moulitsas: We'll Get Killed in 2010
Sun, 20 Dec 2009 10:25 PM
Markos Moulitsas, founder of the Daily Kos and an influential leader of the Web-based political left, said Sunday that Democrats are facing huge defeats in the 2010 elections because the Obama administration has alienated the Democratic Party's liberal political base with its escalating involvement in Afghanistan, and its failure to push for universal healthcare.
Speaking on NBC's "Meet the Press," Moulitsas offered a bleak scenario for House and Senate races next year.
Excerpts:
MR.GREGORY: Markos Moulitsas, I want to start with you. You heard David Axelrod say this is in keeping with the president's principles; it is in keeping, this compromise on health care, with the way the president campaigned on this. And this is the bill, essentially, the reform that Americans deserve. What do you say?
MR. MARKOS MOULITSAS: Yeah, I don't think this is a reform bill. I mean, I think it's very clear, this is not insurance or healthcare reform. What it is, it's allowing more people, 30 million people, to buy into the existing broken system. It's very important to keep in mind that healthcare insurance is not the same as health care. Insurance, not the same as care. If you go up to Massachusetts, they have a, a mandate as well, and last year 21 percent of people in Massachusetts could not get health care because they could not afford it. Even though they had insurance, the premiums--not the premiums, the deductibles, copays and out-of-pocket expenses were too high. So really, this isn't reform. It's expanding the system, it's almost rewarding the existing system. Now, what is important about this is that it actually puts the federal government, puts America on the place to say health care is a right, it's not a privilege to just those who are--who can afford it or who are lucky enough to have a good job that has good benefits. But as far as reform goes, I think this is a long battle that we have ahead of us.
MR. MOULITSAS: Well, you can't talk about health care and Afghanistan being distractions. They're the reasons that Obama won the White House and Democrats won control of Congress, including big, massive support from independents. Independents knew what they were voting for when they voted for Obama and the Democrats. I think the problem with Obama's numbers and, and Congress' numbers is that people voted for a Congress and a president that was going to take on entrenched interests. Now, Republicans had jumped off the Obama bandwagon from day one. They were never on board. Independents have sort of been unhappy because I think independents really want results, and we haven't seen a lot of results. We've seen a lot of bickering, and most of it has been internally within the Democratic Party, and I think that's why they're turning off. And a lot of Democrats are becoming disenchanted.
MR. GREGORY: ...What does the president need to address to keep his own party in line? Should there be personnel changes in the White House? What do you think the left is going to demand?
MR. MOULITSAS: Well, 2006 is going to be a base year. It's going to be a base election.
MR. GREGORY: 2010, you mean.
MR. MOULITSAS: I mean 2010.
MR. GREGORY: Yeah.
MR. MOULITSAS: And according to my own polling, we use an independent pollster, 86 percent of Republicans plan on turning out or are likely to turn out. Only 56 percent of Democrats are--similarly believe they're going to turn out or likely to turn out. Only 32 percent of African-Americans, only 41 percent of 18 to 29-year-olds. We have numbers like that, we're going to get killed in 2010. So the Democrats have to start paying attention to the base, have to start probably picking some fights. I mean, maybe regulatory reform could be a way to do that.
Elections 2009-2012
Moderator: Super Moderators
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politic ... t_run.html
Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani expected to announce Tuesday he will not run for U.S. Senate
BY DAVID SALTONSTALL
DAILY NEWS SENIOR CORRESPONDENT
Originally Published:Monday, December 21st 2009, 6:29 PM
Updated: Monday, December 21st 2009, 6:53 PM
Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani is expected to announce Tuesday he is not running for U.S. Senate or anything else in 2010, effectively ending his storied - and often stormy - electoral career, The Daily News has learned.
The announcement, at which he'll also endorse Republican Rick Lazio for governor, marks the end of a year-long political dance by Giuliani, who mulled bids for governor and then Senate before backing away from both.
He had reason to weigh each run: surveys showed him a clear favorite to win primaries for either office, and as recently as last week a poll showed Giuliani crushing freshman Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand by 10 points.
But the former mayor has decided to stay in the private sector, where he will continue his work as a security consultant, a sometimes TV commentator and, increasingly, a celebrity draw on the GOP fund-raising circuit.
"Next year should be an interesting cycle for Republicans, and he sees it as an opportunity to engage in targeted races across the country," said a person familiar with Giuliani's plans.
Giuliani's decision to endorse Lazio - whom Giuliani famously big-footed when he chose to run for Senate in 2000, only to see Lazio replace him on the ballot after dropping out to battle prostate cancer - is the start of his push to help other GOPers, insiders said.
Ironically, however, Giuliani's decision not to run will almost certainly benefit the Democratic Gillibrand more than anyone.
The former mayor's step back all but assures that the freshman Gillibrand, appointed earlier this year by Gov. Paterson to fill Secretary of State Clinton's old seat, will not face any big-name GOPers.
"Her path is now cleared," enthused one Democratic operative.
Barring some major turn of events, the decision marks the end of an electoral future for the now 65-year-old ex-mayor, whose career in many ways helped to define New York over the last quarter century.
He leaves a legacy full of bright upsides and corresponding downsides.
As mayor, he drove down crime to historic lows, but often at the expense of race relations, and frequently with a style regarded by many as insular and bullyish.
He preached personal responsibility, then informed his wife - via press conference - that he was divorcing her.
"I have always said that he was a good mayor - just a terrible person," said former Mayor Ed Koch. "And by terrible person, I mean he didn't respect anyone else's opinion. But he delivered essential services."
Giuliani's fame grew exponentially in the days after 9/11, when he seemed to carry the city - and the nation - on his shoulders. The aura of that day propelled him to a run for the presidency, and for much of 2007 he was the Republican front-runner.
But GOP voters, put off by Giuliani's pro-choice, pro-gay rights background - as well as news stories alleging he had used NYPD cop cars as mayor to squire his then mistress and now wife, Judith, around town - paid him almost no mind once voting began.
Had Giuliani run for Senate, all his scandalous baggage - which includes his former top cop, Bernard Kerik, who last month pleaded guilty to accepting home renovations from a mobbed up contractor - would have been unpacked again.
Now he has other plans, friends said.
"Yeah, like enjoying his life," said one.
--
Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani is expected to announce that he will not be running for Senate.
Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani expected to announce Tuesday he will not run for U.S. Senate
BY DAVID SALTONSTALL
DAILY NEWS SENIOR CORRESPONDENT
Originally Published:Monday, December 21st 2009, 6:29 PM
Updated: Monday, December 21st 2009, 6:53 PM
Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani is expected to announce Tuesday he is not running for U.S. Senate or anything else in 2010, effectively ending his storied - and often stormy - electoral career, The Daily News has learned.
The announcement, at which he'll also endorse Republican Rick Lazio for governor, marks the end of a year-long political dance by Giuliani, who mulled bids for governor and then Senate before backing away from both.
He had reason to weigh each run: surveys showed him a clear favorite to win primaries for either office, and as recently as last week a poll showed Giuliani crushing freshman Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand by 10 points.
But the former mayor has decided to stay in the private sector, where he will continue his work as a security consultant, a sometimes TV commentator and, increasingly, a celebrity draw on the GOP fund-raising circuit.
"Next year should be an interesting cycle for Republicans, and he sees it as an opportunity to engage in targeted races across the country," said a person familiar with Giuliani's plans.
Giuliani's decision to endorse Lazio - whom Giuliani famously big-footed when he chose to run for Senate in 2000, only to see Lazio replace him on the ballot after dropping out to battle prostate cancer - is the start of his push to help other GOPers, insiders said.
Ironically, however, Giuliani's decision not to run will almost certainly benefit the Democratic Gillibrand more than anyone.
The former mayor's step back all but assures that the freshman Gillibrand, appointed earlier this year by Gov. Paterson to fill Secretary of State Clinton's old seat, will not face any big-name GOPers.
"Her path is now cleared," enthused one Democratic operative.
Barring some major turn of events, the decision marks the end of an electoral future for the now 65-year-old ex-mayor, whose career in many ways helped to define New York over the last quarter century.
He leaves a legacy full of bright upsides and corresponding downsides.
As mayor, he drove down crime to historic lows, but often at the expense of race relations, and frequently with a style regarded by many as insular and bullyish.
He preached personal responsibility, then informed his wife - via press conference - that he was divorcing her.
"I have always said that he was a good mayor - just a terrible person," said former Mayor Ed Koch. "And by terrible person, I mean he didn't respect anyone else's opinion. But he delivered essential services."
Giuliani's fame grew exponentially in the days after 9/11, when he seemed to carry the city - and the nation - on his shoulders. The aura of that day propelled him to a run for the presidency, and for much of 2007 he was the Republican front-runner.
But GOP voters, put off by Giuliani's pro-choice, pro-gay rights background - as well as news stories alleging he had used NYPD cop cars as mayor to squire his then mistress and now wife, Judith, around town - paid him almost no mind once voting began.
Had Giuliani run for Senate, all his scandalous baggage - which includes his former top cop, Bernard Kerik, who last month pleaded guilty to accepting home renovations from a mobbed up contractor - would have been unpacked again.
Now he has other plans, friends said.
"Yeah, like enjoying his life," said one.
--
Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani is expected to announce that he will not be running for Senate.
racehorse
It is a long way until the May primary. I am concerned but still predict Trey Grayson will be the next United States Senator from Kentucky!
--
http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com ... s-big.html
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Paul leads big
If there was any doubt Rand Paul is a serious candidate for the Republican Senate nomination in Kentucky it can be cast away. Our first poll of the race finds him leading Trey Grayson 44-25.
Paul is, as the conventional wisdom suggests, drawing his strongest support from Republicans who are unhappy with their party. He has a 54-22 lead over Grayson with voters who are unhappy with the GOP in Congress and a 54-18 advantage with folks who think the party's grown too liberal.
His support is broader than that though- he has a 40-25 lead even with people who like the job Republicans in Congress are doing and a 38-28 advantage with ones who are comfortable with where their party is ideologically.
Despite Paul's early advantage this race could change a lot between now and the election, primarily because neither of the candidates are all that well known at this point. A plurality don't know enough about Paul to have formed an opinion of him and a majority have no feelings one way or the other yet toward Grayson.
Among those who do have perceptions formed about them 39% view Paul favorably to 13% unfavorable and 22% view Grayson favorably to 15% unfavorable.
Paul's current strong standing certainly speaks to the increasingly favorable prospects for candidates running against the Republican establishment across the country, especially on the heels of polling last week showing Marco Rubio closing in on or even taking the lead against Charlie Crist. It's going to be interesting to see if a lot more of these insurgent candidates crop up as we turn the calendar to 2010.
Full results here ( http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/ ... Y_1222.pdf )
--
http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com ... s-big.html
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Paul leads big
If there was any doubt Rand Paul is a serious candidate for the Republican Senate nomination in Kentucky it can be cast away. Our first poll of the race finds him leading Trey Grayson 44-25.
Paul is, as the conventional wisdom suggests, drawing his strongest support from Republicans who are unhappy with their party. He has a 54-22 lead over Grayson with voters who are unhappy with the GOP in Congress and a 54-18 advantage with folks who think the party's grown too liberal.
His support is broader than that though- he has a 40-25 lead even with people who like the job Republicans in Congress are doing and a 38-28 advantage with ones who are comfortable with where their party is ideologically.
Despite Paul's early advantage this race could change a lot between now and the election, primarily because neither of the candidates are all that well known at this point. A plurality don't know enough about Paul to have formed an opinion of him and a majority have no feelings one way or the other yet toward Grayson.
Among those who do have perceptions formed about them 39% view Paul favorably to 13% unfavorable and 22% view Grayson favorably to 15% unfavorable.
Paul's current strong standing certainly speaks to the increasingly favorable prospects for candidates running against the Republican establishment across the country, especially on the heels of polling last week showing Marco Rubio closing in on or even taking the lead against Charlie Crist. It's going to be interesting to see if a lot more of these insurgent candidates crop up as we turn the calendar to 2010.
Full results here ( http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/ ... Y_1222.pdf )
Last edited by racehorse on 12-22-2009 12:27 PM, edited 1 time in total.
racehorse
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm? ... D072F03AAD
Exclusive: Rep. Parker Griffith switches to GOP
By: Josh Kraushaar
December 22, 2009 10:57 AM EST
POLITICO has learned that Rep. Parker Griffith, a freshman Democrat from Alabama, will announce today that he’s switching parties to become a Republican.
According to two senior GOP aides familiar with the decision, the announcement will take place this afternoon in Griffith's district in northern Alabama.
Griffith’s party switch comes on the eve of a pivotal congressional health care vote and will send a jolt through a Democratic House Caucus that has already been unnerved by the recent retirements of a handful of members who, like Griffith, hail from districts that offer prime pickup opportunities for the GOP in 2010.
The switch represents a coup for the House Republican leadership, which had been courting Griffith since he publicly criticized the Democratic leadership in the wake of raucous town halls during the summer.
Griffith, who captured the seat in a close 2008 open seat contest, will become the first Republican to hold the historically Democratic, Huntsville-based district. A radiation oncologist who founded a cancer treatment center, Griffith plans to blast the Democratic health care bill as a prime reason for his decision to switch parties—and is expected to cite his medical background as his authority on the subject.
While the timing of his announcement was unexpected, Griffith’s party switch will not come as a surprise to those familiar with his voting record, which is one of the most conservative among Democrats.
He has bucked the Democratic leadership on nearly all of its major domestic initiatives, including the stimulus package, health care legislation, the cap-and trade energy bill and financial regulatory reform.
He was one of only 11 House Democrats to vote against the stimulus.
“Look at his voting record – he’s had substantial differences philosophically with the Democratic agenda here in Congress,” said an Alabama ally who is familiar with Griffith’s decision. “It’s something that’s been discussed for the last several months… talking to people in his family. And it genuinely is a reflection of where he feels. It’s his own personal conviction.”
The Obama administration’s decision to scrap plans to build a missile defense shield in Eastern Europe further frustrated Griffith, according to GOP sources, because his district contains the base for Boeing’s ground-based missile defense research.
Ironically, a National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman called Griffith a “woefully ineffective advocate for Tennessee Valley jobs” after the decision was announced in September.
Signs of Griffith’s dissatisfaction with his party began to surface publicly during the summer recess, when he received an earful of criticism from constituents.
In August — one month after Republicans picked up his former state legislative seat in a special election — Griffith told a local newspaper that he wouldn't vote for Nancy Pelosi to remain as House Speaker because she's too divisive. He joked that if she didn’t like it, he’d provide her with a gift certificate to a mental health center.
He added that if the Democratic leadership wouldn't commit to working in a more bipartisan manner, "perhaps we should look at altering that."
Later that month, he was booed at a town hall forum, even though he said he was against his leadership’s version of health care reform.
“If I'm agreeing with you, don't fight me," Griffith said to a heckler, according to the Huntsville Times. "I'm on your team."
After the November off-year elections, he told POLITICO that he wanted to be called an independent Blue Dog and not a Democrat. He said the point of the elections was clear: “I should be nervous.”
Democratic pollster John Anzalone, an Alabama native, said that Griffith would have faced a difficult re-election, and undoubtedly was worried about his prospects in a conservative district.
“This is never a pleasant thing… you never can really figure out the motivation. Usually, it’s political opportunism. Parker Griffith can win as a Democrat, but it’s easier to win as a Republican,” said Anzalone. “When you run as a Southern Democrat, you run because you have a certain principle of being with the party of the people. You know what you’re getting into, there’s no surprise on the legislative side. It’s a political calculation.”
Several Republicans have already stepped forward to challenge Griffith, and it’s not clear whether they’ll drop their bids in light of his party switch. Madison County Commissioner Mo Brooks has already raised more than $100,000 for the campaign, while Navy veteran Les Phillip also is running.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee will now have to scramble to find a candidate to run against Griffith before Alabama’s April 2 filing deadline.
Though it has never elected a Republican to Congress, Griffith’s seat has a long conservative tradition and has backed Democrats who have a brand independent from the national party. As a result of the district’s Democratic heritage, Democrats still hold the majority of state legislative seats within the 5th Congressional District’s boundaries.
The district, however, is trending Republican: A wave of new residents is moving into the Huntsville suburbs, where the area’s burgeoning aerospace and defense industries have created a miniboom. And those voters, with fewer ties to the area’s past politics, have been reliably Republican at the national level.
The district gave John McCain a resounding 61 percent of the vote last year — a tick above the 60 percent President George W. Bush won in 2004.
Even so, last year Griffith managed a narrow win against the strong drag at the top of the ticket in one of the nastiest House races in the nation. He defeated Republican Wayne Parker 51 percent to 48 percent, despite heavy GOP spending against him.
The National Republican Congressional Committee poured in $514,000 to air ads attacking Griffith, including one that suggested he was soft on Islamic terrorism.
And the committee raised questions about whether Griffith engaged in medical malpractice when it released decades-old documentation accusing his cancer center of underdosing patients with radiation so that he could collect more money.
Griffith is the first House Democrat to switch parties since Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-La.) changed parties in 2004. The most recent member of Congress to switch parties is Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.), who announced his decision in April.
Griffith’s predecessor, former nine-term Rep. Bud Cramer, had been frequently mentioned as a possible party-switcher — and also as a possible appointee in the Bush administration — but he retired from Congress as a Democrat.
Griffith now has $619,000 in the bank to run as a Republican, a total boosted by contributions from several of the Democratic Party’s more liberal leaders. The political action committee of House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer donated $10,000 to Griffith’s reelection this year, and even Pelosi chipped in $4,000 — prior to Griffith's August remarks.
Exclusive: Rep. Parker Griffith switches to GOP
By: Josh Kraushaar
December 22, 2009 10:57 AM EST
POLITICO has learned that Rep. Parker Griffith, a freshman Democrat from Alabama, will announce today that he’s switching parties to become a Republican.
According to two senior GOP aides familiar with the decision, the announcement will take place this afternoon in Griffith's district in northern Alabama.
Griffith’s party switch comes on the eve of a pivotal congressional health care vote and will send a jolt through a Democratic House Caucus that has already been unnerved by the recent retirements of a handful of members who, like Griffith, hail from districts that offer prime pickup opportunities for the GOP in 2010.
The switch represents a coup for the House Republican leadership, which had been courting Griffith since he publicly criticized the Democratic leadership in the wake of raucous town halls during the summer.
Griffith, who captured the seat in a close 2008 open seat contest, will become the first Republican to hold the historically Democratic, Huntsville-based district. A radiation oncologist who founded a cancer treatment center, Griffith plans to blast the Democratic health care bill as a prime reason for his decision to switch parties—and is expected to cite his medical background as his authority on the subject.
While the timing of his announcement was unexpected, Griffith’s party switch will not come as a surprise to those familiar with his voting record, which is one of the most conservative among Democrats.
He has bucked the Democratic leadership on nearly all of its major domestic initiatives, including the stimulus package, health care legislation, the cap-and trade energy bill and financial regulatory reform.
He was one of only 11 House Democrats to vote against the stimulus.
“Look at his voting record – he’s had substantial differences philosophically with the Democratic agenda here in Congress,” said an Alabama ally who is familiar with Griffith’s decision. “It’s something that’s been discussed for the last several months… talking to people in his family. And it genuinely is a reflection of where he feels. It’s his own personal conviction.”
The Obama administration’s decision to scrap plans to build a missile defense shield in Eastern Europe further frustrated Griffith, according to GOP sources, because his district contains the base for Boeing’s ground-based missile defense research.
Ironically, a National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman called Griffith a “woefully ineffective advocate for Tennessee Valley jobs” after the decision was announced in September.
Signs of Griffith’s dissatisfaction with his party began to surface publicly during the summer recess, when he received an earful of criticism from constituents.
In August — one month after Republicans picked up his former state legislative seat in a special election — Griffith told a local newspaper that he wouldn't vote for Nancy Pelosi to remain as House Speaker because she's too divisive. He joked that if she didn’t like it, he’d provide her with a gift certificate to a mental health center.
He added that if the Democratic leadership wouldn't commit to working in a more bipartisan manner, "perhaps we should look at altering that."
Later that month, he was booed at a town hall forum, even though he said he was against his leadership’s version of health care reform.
“If I'm agreeing with you, don't fight me," Griffith said to a heckler, according to the Huntsville Times. "I'm on your team."
After the November off-year elections, he told POLITICO that he wanted to be called an independent Blue Dog and not a Democrat. He said the point of the elections was clear: “I should be nervous.”
Democratic pollster John Anzalone, an Alabama native, said that Griffith would have faced a difficult re-election, and undoubtedly was worried about his prospects in a conservative district.
“This is never a pleasant thing… you never can really figure out the motivation. Usually, it’s political opportunism. Parker Griffith can win as a Democrat, but it’s easier to win as a Republican,” said Anzalone. “When you run as a Southern Democrat, you run because you have a certain principle of being with the party of the people. You know what you’re getting into, there’s no surprise on the legislative side. It’s a political calculation.”
Several Republicans have already stepped forward to challenge Griffith, and it’s not clear whether they’ll drop their bids in light of his party switch. Madison County Commissioner Mo Brooks has already raised more than $100,000 for the campaign, while Navy veteran Les Phillip also is running.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee will now have to scramble to find a candidate to run against Griffith before Alabama’s April 2 filing deadline.
Though it has never elected a Republican to Congress, Griffith’s seat has a long conservative tradition and has backed Democrats who have a brand independent from the national party. As a result of the district’s Democratic heritage, Democrats still hold the majority of state legislative seats within the 5th Congressional District’s boundaries.
The district, however, is trending Republican: A wave of new residents is moving into the Huntsville suburbs, where the area’s burgeoning aerospace and defense industries have created a miniboom. And those voters, with fewer ties to the area’s past politics, have been reliably Republican at the national level.
The district gave John McCain a resounding 61 percent of the vote last year — a tick above the 60 percent President George W. Bush won in 2004.
Even so, last year Griffith managed a narrow win against the strong drag at the top of the ticket in one of the nastiest House races in the nation. He defeated Republican Wayne Parker 51 percent to 48 percent, despite heavy GOP spending against him.
The National Republican Congressional Committee poured in $514,000 to air ads attacking Griffith, including one that suggested he was soft on Islamic terrorism.
And the committee raised questions about whether Griffith engaged in medical malpractice when it released decades-old documentation accusing his cancer center of underdosing patients with radiation so that he could collect more money.
Griffith is the first House Democrat to switch parties since Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-La.) changed parties in 2004. The most recent member of Congress to switch parties is Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.), who announced his decision in April.
Griffith’s predecessor, former nine-term Rep. Bud Cramer, had been frequently mentioned as a possible party-switcher — and also as a possible appointee in the Bush administration — but he retired from Congress as a Democrat.
Griffith now has $619,000 in the bank to run as a Republican, a total boosted by contributions from several of the Democratic Party’s more liberal leaders. The political action committee of House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer donated $10,000 to Griffith’s reelection this year, and even Pelosi chipped in $4,000 — prior to Griffith's August remarks.
racehorse
KY-Sen: Paul Takes a Huge Primary Lead Over Grayson
Swing State Project - Dec 22nd, 2009
KY-Sen: Paul Takes a Huge Primary Lead Over Grayson, Conway Leads Mongiardo
Rand Paul (R): 44
Trey Grayson (R): 25
Undecided: 32
(MoE: ±4.5%)
That's an absolutely stunning lead for Paul, and some major egg-on-face for Mitch McConnell and the NRSC brain trust. We haven't seen a lot of public polling of the GOP primary, but warning signs emerged in August for Grayson, Kentucky's Secretary of State, when SurveyUSA released a poll showing him leading Paul by only 37-26. Research 2000 followed that up a couple of weeks later with a 40-25 Grayson lead. Just last month, SUSA followed up on the race and found that Paul had actually eked into a narrow 35-32 lead. Given the amount of heat that Grayson has been directing Paul's way in the past week over his ex-campaign spokesman's questionable association with white supremacists on MySpace, you know that Grayson realizes that he'll need to fight his way out of this one in a desperate fashion.
Now, you might think that a Paul primary win would be good news for Democrats, but check out what PPP is teasing about the still-to-be-released general election numbers:
the Kentucky general election numbers we'll release Wednesday show Rand Paul doing only one point worse than Trey Grayson against Jack Conway and three points worse against Dan Mongiardo.
That said, Paul definitely represents a weirder strain of Republican conservatism that could end up being a liability in a general election. His questionable inner circle is one thing, but consider also Ron Paul's non-position on 9/11 Trutherism. As an outsider, Paul is riding on a high against the establishment's hand-picked candidate, but his freak-wing politics will be ripe for clobbering if he makes it through a primary.
And for the Democrats...
Jack Conway (D): 37
Dan Mongiardo (D): 33
Undecided: 30
(MoE: ±4.2%)
This is the first poll we've seen of Conway leading Mongiardo all year. SUSA gave Mongiardo an 11-point lead in November (up from 8 in August), while R2K found Conway trailing by 37-30 in September. In any case, Mongiardo enjoys broader name recognition, so Conway has some room for growth here.
http://www.swingstateproject.com/showDi ... aryId=6068
KY-Sen: Paul Takes a Huge Primary Lead Over Grayson, Conway Leads Mongiardo
Rand Paul (R): 44
Trey Grayson (R): 25
Undecided: 32
(MoE: ±4.5%)
That's an absolutely stunning lead for Paul, and some major egg-on-face for Mitch McConnell and the NRSC brain trust. We haven't seen a lot of public polling of the GOP primary, but warning signs emerged in August for Grayson, Kentucky's Secretary of State, when SurveyUSA released a poll showing him leading Paul by only 37-26. Research 2000 followed that up a couple of weeks later with a 40-25 Grayson lead. Just last month, SUSA followed up on the race and found that Paul had actually eked into a narrow 35-32 lead. Given the amount of heat that Grayson has been directing Paul's way in the past week over his ex-campaign spokesman's questionable association with white supremacists on MySpace, you know that Grayson realizes that he'll need to fight his way out of this one in a desperate fashion.
Now, you might think that a Paul primary win would be good news for Democrats, but check out what PPP is teasing about the still-to-be-released general election numbers:
the Kentucky general election numbers we'll release Wednesday show Rand Paul doing only one point worse than Trey Grayson against Jack Conway and three points worse against Dan Mongiardo.
That said, Paul definitely represents a weirder strain of Republican conservatism that could end up being a liability in a general election. His questionable inner circle is one thing, but consider also Ron Paul's non-position on 9/11 Trutherism. As an outsider, Paul is riding on a high against the establishment's hand-picked candidate, but his freak-wing politics will be ripe for clobbering if he makes it through a primary.
And for the Democrats...
Jack Conway (D): 37
Dan Mongiardo (D): 33
Undecided: 30
(MoE: ±4.2%)
This is the first poll we've seen of Conway leading Mongiardo all year. SUSA gave Mongiardo an 11-point lead in November (up from 8 in August), while R2K found Conway trailing by 37-30 in September. In any case, Mongiardo enjoys broader name recognition, so Conway has some room for growth here.
http://www.swingstateproject.com/showDi ... aryId=6068
In this Newsmax video interview Kentucky United States Senate GOP Primary candidate Dr. Rand Paul admits the Democratic health care plan is dangerous for the country and will result in health care rationing. He says he favors abolishing the Department of Education, is opposed to the income tax and could support a national sales tax instead. He also reaffirms his opposition to the Patriot Act and support for the "Tea Party movement".
---
<object id="flashObj" width="486" height="412" classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shoc ... ,0"><param name="movie" value="http://c.brightcove.com/services/viewer ... 4494319001" /><param name="bgcolor" value="#FFFFFF" /><param name="flashVars" value="videoId=57943911001&playerID=14599856001&domain=embed&" /><param name="base" value="http://admin.brightcove.com" /><param name="seamlesstabbing" value="false" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="swLiveConnect" value="true" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><embed src="http://c.brightcove.com/services/viewer ... 4494319001" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" flashVars="videoId=57943911001&playerID=14599856001&domain=embed&" base="http://admin.brightcove.com" name="flashObj" width="486" height="412" seamlesstabbing="false" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowFullScreen="true" swLiveConnect="true" allowScriptAccess="always" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/dow ... d></object>
---
<object id="flashObj" width="486" height="412" classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shoc ... ,0"><param name="movie" value="http://c.brightcove.com/services/viewer ... 4494319001" /><param name="bgcolor" value="#FFFFFF" /><param name="flashVars" value="videoId=57943911001&playerID=14599856001&domain=embed&" /><param name="base" value="http://admin.brightcove.com" /><param name="seamlesstabbing" value="false" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="swLiveConnect" value="true" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><embed src="http://c.brightcove.com/services/viewer ... 4494319001" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" flashVars="videoId=57943911001&playerID=14599856001&domain=embed&" base="http://admin.brightcove.com" name="flashObj" width="486" height="412" seamlesstabbing="false" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowFullScreen="true" swLiveConnect="true" allowScriptAccess="always" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/dow ... d></object>
Last edited by racehorse on 12-22-2009 09:24 PM, edited 1 time in total.
racehorse
http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,881 ... 79,00.html
Tuesday, Dec. 22, 2009
Why Obama Has to Worry About Polls
By Michael Scherer / WASHINGTON
George W. Bush used to insist that he didn't read polls, and on the off chance that he did, he didn't care anyway. "I don't give a darn," the former President famously said early this year just before the end of his term, when CNN's Larry King pointed to his anemic approval ratings.
Aides to President Obama, by contrast, have charted a more nuanced course, alternately embracing and dismissing the polls. During a recent meeting with reporters, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs compared the President's daily approval ratings to a heart monitor, saying, "I don't put a lot of stake in, never have, in the EKG that is the daily Gallup trend." By contrast, senior aide David Axelrod often mentions poll numbers, on everything from the rising international reputation of the United States to the resilience of Obama's personal likability numbers. "Every poll I've seen suggests that even among those who don't support necessarily his policies, there is a warm feeling," said Axelrod, in a recent interview with U.S. News. (See "Obama After a Year: What's Changed, and What Hasn't.")
For much of this year, such poll talk was not much of a factor, as the results generally followed the typical pattern of first-term presidencies, with a strong honeymoon period that slowly petered out. But as Obama approaches the first year mark of his presidency, Democratic and Republican strategists are beginning to look more closely at the polls. Here's why:
1. Congress cares about polls.
Obama's success depends upon his ability to get Congress to do his bidding, and as the polls have soured, this has become a much tougher proposition. With the President's approval rating now dipping below 50% in most polls, Democratic pollsters have begun to sound the alarm. In a recent public memo, Celinda Lake, of Lake Research Partners, pointed to a sobering statistic: Presidents with approval ratings below 50% have lost an average of 41 House seats in mid-term elections. (Democrats currently have an 81-seat advantage in the House, so Republicans could gain control of the chamber with a 41-seat pick-up in 2010.) To make matters worse, Republicans now win the generic Congressional ballot by two points, the first time the GOP has outstripped Democrats since January of 2002, according to the George Washington University Battleground Poll.
2. Health-care reform has become a burden.
Something has gone wrong on the long trail to historic health reform. For one thing, Americans no longer support what is going on. The recent Wall Street Journal/NBC poll found that 44% of the country believe it would be better not to pass any plan at all, while 41% said it would be better to pass the plan. As recently as October, the same poll showed those numbers practically reversed. One reason is a misalignment of priorities. The health care debate has, ironically, intensified American contentment with their current health coverage. The July Battleground poll found that 84% of Americans were "satisfied" with their health care. The same poll in December found 91% of Americans satisfied with their health care. By contrast, 51% of the same group of people rated their economic situation as "just fair" or "poor," a clear signal that people care far more about the economy and jobs than they do about their co-pays and deductibles. In the Battleground poll, 29% of Americans said they feel insecure about their access to health care, compared to 48% who said they feel insecure about their families' finances.
3. The Obama movement has gone missing.
The 2009 elections in New Jersey and Virginia were initially talked about by Obama allies as a test of the President's organizing power. By the time the votes were counted, however, with Republicans winning two Democratic seats, no one at the White House wanted to claim any responsibility. That's because the remarkable enthusiasm that greeted Obama's victory in 2008, with record turnout among independents, blacks and young people, had gone away, along with the minions of Obama organizers. "I think that we all thought, and I think that the President thought, that they would stay with it because we would create this movement," explained Lake, at a recent reporter briefing organized by the Christian Science Monitor. In fact, the enthusiasm gap bodes poorly for 2010, when Obama will be trying to minimize losses in the House and the Senate. According to the recent Battleground poll, just under two-thirds of Democrats say they are extremely likely to vote in upcoming elections, compared to 77% of Republicans and Independents.
4. Keynes doesn't play in Peoria.
Obama has followed a traditionally Keynesian economic path in responding to the recession — temporarily increasing government spending to make up for slack in the economy. But voters, who continue to suffer from the downturn, are not so impressed. In a recent focus group with independent voters who voted for Obama, Republican pollster Ed Goeas found significant concern about government spending. "There was a tipping point that occurred," he said. "The biggest thing I have seen beyond the intensity and the independents moving has been this focus, in the middle of a very bad economy, on spending." He continued, "They have moved from a maybe-we-have-to-do-this to a how-are-we going-to-pay-for-this. It's going to be our children and our grandchildren." Both the White House and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have announced that they recognize this concern and plan to devote a significant part of the spring addressing the deficit. As Lake puts it, "We haven't proven to the voters that we are spending money to produce jobs for them."
5. Washington has not changed.
President Obama continues to get higher ratings for personal likability and trustworthiness than his Republican foes. But there are also signs that Obama is beginning to feel the taint of the long-standing anger against politics and politicians in general. The Wall Street Journal/NBC poll found in December that 61% of the country has only some confidence, or no confidence, in Obama having the right set of goals and priorities to be President. Meanwhile, America's confidence in general remains in the gutter. When asked if they trust that government will do what is right, 32% said almost never and 46% said only some of the time. In the Battleground poll, Democrats, Republicans and Independents all disapprove of the job Congress is doing, though the numbers among swing-voting independents are most concerning for the party in power. A full 77% of this group disapprove of the Congress's job performance. Only 15% approve.
Tuesday, Dec. 22, 2009
Why Obama Has to Worry About Polls
By Michael Scherer / WASHINGTON
George W. Bush used to insist that he didn't read polls, and on the off chance that he did, he didn't care anyway. "I don't give a darn," the former President famously said early this year just before the end of his term, when CNN's Larry King pointed to his anemic approval ratings.
Aides to President Obama, by contrast, have charted a more nuanced course, alternately embracing and dismissing the polls. During a recent meeting with reporters, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs compared the President's daily approval ratings to a heart monitor, saying, "I don't put a lot of stake in, never have, in the EKG that is the daily Gallup trend." By contrast, senior aide David Axelrod often mentions poll numbers, on everything from the rising international reputation of the United States to the resilience of Obama's personal likability numbers. "Every poll I've seen suggests that even among those who don't support necessarily his policies, there is a warm feeling," said Axelrod, in a recent interview with U.S. News. (See "Obama After a Year: What's Changed, and What Hasn't.")
For much of this year, such poll talk was not much of a factor, as the results generally followed the typical pattern of first-term presidencies, with a strong honeymoon period that slowly petered out. But as Obama approaches the first year mark of his presidency, Democratic and Republican strategists are beginning to look more closely at the polls. Here's why:
1. Congress cares about polls.
Obama's success depends upon his ability to get Congress to do his bidding, and as the polls have soured, this has become a much tougher proposition. With the President's approval rating now dipping below 50% in most polls, Democratic pollsters have begun to sound the alarm. In a recent public memo, Celinda Lake, of Lake Research Partners, pointed to a sobering statistic: Presidents with approval ratings below 50% have lost an average of 41 House seats in mid-term elections. (Democrats currently have an 81-seat advantage in the House, so Republicans could gain control of the chamber with a 41-seat pick-up in 2010.) To make matters worse, Republicans now win the generic Congressional ballot by two points, the first time the GOP has outstripped Democrats since January of 2002, according to the George Washington University Battleground Poll.
2. Health-care reform has become a burden.
Something has gone wrong on the long trail to historic health reform. For one thing, Americans no longer support what is going on. The recent Wall Street Journal/NBC poll found that 44% of the country believe it would be better not to pass any plan at all, while 41% said it would be better to pass the plan. As recently as October, the same poll showed those numbers practically reversed. One reason is a misalignment of priorities. The health care debate has, ironically, intensified American contentment with their current health coverage. The July Battleground poll found that 84% of Americans were "satisfied" with their health care. The same poll in December found 91% of Americans satisfied with their health care. By contrast, 51% of the same group of people rated their economic situation as "just fair" or "poor," a clear signal that people care far more about the economy and jobs than they do about their co-pays and deductibles. In the Battleground poll, 29% of Americans said they feel insecure about their access to health care, compared to 48% who said they feel insecure about their families' finances.
3. The Obama movement has gone missing.
The 2009 elections in New Jersey and Virginia were initially talked about by Obama allies as a test of the President's organizing power. By the time the votes were counted, however, with Republicans winning two Democratic seats, no one at the White House wanted to claim any responsibility. That's because the remarkable enthusiasm that greeted Obama's victory in 2008, with record turnout among independents, blacks and young people, had gone away, along with the minions of Obama organizers. "I think that we all thought, and I think that the President thought, that they would stay with it because we would create this movement," explained Lake, at a recent reporter briefing organized by the Christian Science Monitor. In fact, the enthusiasm gap bodes poorly for 2010, when Obama will be trying to minimize losses in the House and the Senate. According to the recent Battleground poll, just under two-thirds of Democrats say they are extremely likely to vote in upcoming elections, compared to 77% of Republicans and Independents.
4. Keynes doesn't play in Peoria.
Obama has followed a traditionally Keynesian economic path in responding to the recession — temporarily increasing government spending to make up for slack in the economy. But voters, who continue to suffer from the downturn, are not so impressed. In a recent focus group with independent voters who voted for Obama, Republican pollster Ed Goeas found significant concern about government spending. "There was a tipping point that occurred," he said. "The biggest thing I have seen beyond the intensity and the independents moving has been this focus, in the middle of a very bad economy, on spending." He continued, "They have moved from a maybe-we-have-to-do-this to a how-are-we going-to-pay-for-this. It's going to be our children and our grandchildren." Both the White House and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have announced that they recognize this concern and plan to devote a significant part of the spring addressing the deficit. As Lake puts it, "We haven't proven to the voters that we are spending money to produce jobs for them."
5. Washington has not changed.
President Obama continues to get higher ratings for personal likability and trustworthiness than his Republican foes. But there are also signs that Obama is beginning to feel the taint of the long-standing anger against politics and politicians in general. The Wall Street Journal/NBC poll found in December that 61% of the country has only some confidence, or no confidence, in Obama having the right set of goals and priorities to be President. Meanwhile, America's confidence in general remains in the gutter. When asked if they trust that government will do what is right, 32% said almost never and 46% said only some of the time. In the Battleground poll, Democrats, Republicans and Independents all disapprove of the job Congress is doing, though the numbers among swing-voting independents are most concerning for the party in power. A full 77% of this group disapprove of the Congress's job performance. Only 15% approve.
racehorse
http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com ... tucky.html
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 23, 2009
Republicans favored in Kentucky
Barack Obama's approval rating in Kentucky is only 35%. Support for his health care plan is just 28%. 56% of voters in the state think that Congressional Democrats are too liberal and only 26% have a favorable opinion of them.
Measured against that brutal political context it is perhaps no surprise that Trey Grayson and Rand Paul lead Jack Conway and Dan Mongiardo by margins ranging from 6 to 9 points in the race to replace Jim Bunning in the US Senate.
Grayson does slightly better than Paul in the general election match ups, leading Conway 40-33 and Mongiardo 44-35. Paul leads both by identical 42-36 margins. Democrats are rooting for Paul to win the Republican nomination because they think he'll be easier to pick off in the general election but at least for now there's not a large difference in the viability of the two Republicans.
PPP matched Grayson against Conway and Mongiardo back in April and the difference between how the numbers stacked up then and how they stack up now says a lot about how much the political context has changed nationally over the last half of 2009. Grayson's margin has improved by 10 points against Conway, who he trailed 37-33 in the spring, and by 5 points against Mongiardo, who he led 40-36 on the earlier poll.
The Republican candidates are benefiting from overwhelming support by independents, holding leads ranging from 25-34 points with that group in each of the possible match ups. As is usually the case in Kentucky where a lot of registered Democrats don't actually vote Democratic, particularly at the federal level, the GOP is also a lot more unified than the Democrats. Grayson and Paul win between 69-75% of the Republican vote while Mongiardo and Conway are polling at just 54-61% of the Democratic vote.
It would certainly be premature to write off this seat for the Democrats though. There are a lot of undecideds and it seems unlikely the national political climate could go anywhere but up for the party at this point- they may have hit rock bottom this month as the health care bill moves closer to passage.
Beyond that it's important to note that with the exception of Dan Mongiardo none of the candidates on either side has greater than 50% name recognition right now. 64% have no opinion about Grayson, 63% say the same of Conway, and the numbers are 51% for Rand Paul and 38% for Dan Mongiardo. The dynamics of the race could change a lot as the eventual nominees become better known and voters in the state react favorably to them or not.
For now though in a Republican state in what's shaping up to be a Republican year the Republicans are favored to hold this seat.
Full results here ( http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/ ... Y_1223.pdf _ )
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 23, 2009
Republicans favored in Kentucky
Barack Obama's approval rating in Kentucky is only 35%. Support for his health care plan is just 28%. 56% of voters in the state think that Congressional Democrats are too liberal and only 26% have a favorable opinion of them.
Measured against that brutal political context it is perhaps no surprise that Trey Grayson and Rand Paul lead Jack Conway and Dan Mongiardo by margins ranging from 6 to 9 points in the race to replace Jim Bunning in the US Senate.
Grayson does slightly better than Paul in the general election match ups, leading Conway 40-33 and Mongiardo 44-35. Paul leads both by identical 42-36 margins. Democrats are rooting for Paul to win the Republican nomination because they think he'll be easier to pick off in the general election but at least for now there's not a large difference in the viability of the two Republicans.
PPP matched Grayson against Conway and Mongiardo back in April and the difference between how the numbers stacked up then and how they stack up now says a lot about how much the political context has changed nationally over the last half of 2009. Grayson's margin has improved by 10 points against Conway, who he trailed 37-33 in the spring, and by 5 points against Mongiardo, who he led 40-36 on the earlier poll.
The Republican candidates are benefiting from overwhelming support by independents, holding leads ranging from 25-34 points with that group in each of the possible match ups. As is usually the case in Kentucky where a lot of registered Democrats don't actually vote Democratic, particularly at the federal level, the GOP is also a lot more unified than the Democrats. Grayson and Paul win between 69-75% of the Republican vote while Mongiardo and Conway are polling at just 54-61% of the Democratic vote.
It would certainly be premature to write off this seat for the Democrats though. There are a lot of undecideds and it seems unlikely the national political climate could go anywhere but up for the party at this point- they may have hit rock bottom this month as the health care bill moves closer to passage.
Beyond that it's important to note that with the exception of Dan Mongiardo none of the candidates on either side has greater than 50% name recognition right now. 64% have no opinion about Grayson, 63% say the same of Conway, and the numbers are 51% for Rand Paul and 38% for Dan Mongiardo. The dynamics of the race could change a lot as the eventual nominees become better known and voters in the state react favorably to them or not.
For now though in a Republican state in what's shaping up to be a Republican year the Republicans are favored to hold this seat.
Full results here ( http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/ ... Y_1223.pdf _ )
Last edited by racehorse on 12-23-2009 01:28 PM, edited 1 time in total.
racehorse
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/7341 ... the-scenes
After quiet first months, Franken's sharp tongue emerges in Senate
By Alexander Bolton - 12/23/09 06:00 AM ET
Al Franken, the Democrat from Minnesota who won election to the Senate after a successful career as a comic and author, has begun to show the sharp-tongued side of his personality by ripping into GOP staffers behind the scenes.
Franken has worked diligently to keep a low public profile in Congress while focusing on wonky policy debates. But he has been unable to completely repress the fiery passion that made him a hero of the Democratic Party’s liberal base.
Franken has teamed up with GOP colleagues to introduce a variety of legislation, something that may surprise fans who read his books, such as Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right.
But he has also pummeled Republican senators and their aides, showing a glimpse of the pugilistic style of his best-seller, Rush Limbaugh Is a Big Fat Idiot and Other Observations.
Franken has surprised some of his colleagues behind the scenes by getting into heated tangles with GOP staffers.
One such exchange took place in Franken’s office during a recent meeting with Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and his aides.
Franken invited Corker to his office to discuss an op-ed that Corker penned in a Tennessee newspaper opposing an amendment Franken offered to a defense bill. The measure gave the employees of defense contractors who suffer rape or sexual assault at the workplace the right to sue in court.
The meeting quickly deteriorated when Franken began berating one of Corker’s aides, according to GOP aides familiar with the incident. Franken’s sally was so harsh that Corker told Franken to lay off his aide and direct the comments at him instead.
Franken’s tough approach came as a surprise because Corker scheduled the meeting to mend fences after Franken confronted him about the op-ed during an angry exchange on the Senate floor.
Another GOP staffer, an aide to a Senate Republican leader, found herself at the sharp end of Franken’s wit at a recent reception in the Senate’s Mansfield Room. The tongue-lashing took place at an event to celebrate the swearing-in of GOP Sen. George LeMieux (Fla.).
After the conversation began ordinarily, Franken started to grill the aide about what he sees as the failings of the GOP. Franken demanded to know why it had become the "Party of No" and had exaggerated facts in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, according to another GOP leadership aide.
A spokeswoman for Franken declined to comment on either exchange.
The aide emphasized Franken's accomplishments during his short time in the Senate.
"Sen. Franken is always looking for ways to work with his colleagues to make people's lives better and get things done for Minnesota," said spokeswoman Casey Aden-Wansbury.
"He has built good working relationships with colleagues on both sides of the aisle — half the bills he has introduced have Republican co-sponsors. Sen. Franken is pleased that two of his bills have already been signed into law — and that both passed with bipartisan support," she said.
The incidents with GOP staff have reminded some Senate observers of a mocking interaction Franken had with a conservative student, Peter Fritz, at Carleton College during his Senate campaign. After learning of Fritz’s political orientation, Franken pressed him to defend Reaganomics and mimicked his speech patterns, according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune.
Aden-Wansbury vigorously denied that Franken made fun of Fritz and claimed that element of the report was inaccurate.
“There is a war within Al Franken,” said Lawrence Jacobs, a professor of political science at the University of Minnesota. “The Al Franken head tells him to steer away from the limelight and build his reputation. Then there is his heart, which is quite fiery."
Jacobs said Franken must be careful not to engage in too many political brawls, or it could “reinforce for independent voters what they feared about him, that he’s a hot-headed partisan.”
’
Franken has not just confronted GOP aides at private meetings; he has also mixed it up with Republican colleagues in public on the Senate floor.
In addition to chewing out Corker over the op-ed, earlier this month Franken clashed loudly with Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) on the Senate floor. The dust-up was spurred by Thune’s claim that Democratic healthcare legislation would impose new taxes immediately but fail to implement benefits for several years.
Franken derided Thune’s floor presentation and implied that he had fabricated some of his facts, a more personal confrontation than usual in the clubby Senate. An irate Thune walked off the Senate floor after Franken revealed a private conversation they had on the topic.
“I asked if he mentioned any of the benefits that do kick in [immediately] and he said, ‘Uh no,’ ” Franken said in front of C-SPAN television cameras.
“We are entitled to our own opinions; we’re not entitled to our own facts,” Franken said, raising his voice. “Benefits kick in right away, and if you’re going to hold up a chart that says when taxes kick in and when benefits kick in … you better include the benefits that do kick in right away.”
Franken later apologized to Thune.
And last week, Franken cut off Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) during his speech on the Senate floor. Lieberman, who has drawn the ire of liberals over his opposition to the public health insurance option, asked for an additional moment to finish remarks about amendments he planned to offer, but Franken, who was presiding over the Senate, refused to grant the routine request.
"In my capacity as the senator from Minnesota, I object," Franken said.
"Really?" replied Lieberman.
A spokeswoman for Franken said that the senator was just trying to move along with the legislation, but at a press conference late last week, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) expressed disgust with Franken, saying that Lieberman's request for more time to extend his remarks was "objected to by the newest member of the United States Senate in a most brusque way ... We've got to stop this kind of behavior. I have never seen anything like that and I hope that I don't see it again."
An aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) confirmed to reporters the leader asked colleagues presiding over the chamber to strictly enforce a 10-minute speaking rule.
And Democrats note that despite his criticism, McCain did the same thing to a colleague in 2002 when he objected to former Sen. Mark Dayton’s (D-Minn.) request for an additional 30 seconds of floor time during the Iraq War debate.
These incidents have pulled Franken away from his stated goal of modeling his early career in the Senate on former Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), who made a point of proving herself as a “workhorse,” in Senate parlance, and who teamed up often with Republicans.
Franken’s sharp-elbowed exchanges have come in moments of passion. By all appearances, he has worked to keep partisan outbursts to a minimum, knowing that what may draw listeners to Air America does not play well in the buttoned-down Senate.
He has stayed off national cable shows such as "Countdown with Keith Olbermann" and "The Rachel Maddow Show" to avoid appearing as a celebrity liberal spokesman instead of a hard-working senator from Minnesota.
Franken stayed away from the popular liberal blog Daily Kos until this past weekend, when he submitted a measured defense of his decision to vote for Senate healthcare reform legislation.
Franken, who has shared a lot of his time with Minnesota media outlets, has kept the national press at arm’s length. He participated in his first national conference call over the weekend. The call with colleagues did not, however, push political hot buttons. Instead, it focused on consumer protections in the healthcare bill.
And he has wooed a significant number of Republican colleagues to cooperate on legislative initiatives.
For example, he introduced the Service Dogs for Veterans Act with Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.); a diabetes prevention amendment with Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.); a bill to assist the victims of sexual assault with Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah); and the Compassionate Care for Servicewomen Act with Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine).
But even while Franken has tried to focus on sober policy issues, he has at times become embroiled in heated political debates inadvertently, his defenders say.
This happened with the so-called “anti-rape” amendment Franken offered to a defense bill. The measure barred the government from doing business with contractors that required employees to settle rape and sexual assault charges through arbitration instead of the courts.
The amendment was popular enough to attract 68 votes in the Senate, but it quickly became a political football when liberals used it to attack 30 Republican lawmakers who opposed it.
Liberal comic Jon Stewart slammed Republican opponents on his talk show, and other critics set up a fake website, RepublicansForRape.org, something that did not endear Franken to some of his conservative colleagues.
“It’s partly because Franken’s on a 24/7 watch,” said Jacobs of the University of Minnesota. “Even when he’s not intending to go public, he’s finding himself in the media spotlight.”
---
This story was updated at 12:59 p.m.
After quiet first months, Franken's sharp tongue emerges in Senate
By Alexander Bolton - 12/23/09 06:00 AM ET
Al Franken, the Democrat from Minnesota who won election to the Senate after a successful career as a comic and author, has begun to show the sharp-tongued side of his personality by ripping into GOP staffers behind the scenes.
Franken has worked diligently to keep a low public profile in Congress while focusing on wonky policy debates. But he has been unable to completely repress the fiery passion that made him a hero of the Democratic Party’s liberal base.
Franken has teamed up with GOP colleagues to introduce a variety of legislation, something that may surprise fans who read his books, such as Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right.
But he has also pummeled Republican senators and their aides, showing a glimpse of the pugilistic style of his best-seller, Rush Limbaugh Is a Big Fat Idiot and Other Observations.
Franken has surprised some of his colleagues behind the scenes by getting into heated tangles with GOP staffers.
One such exchange took place in Franken’s office during a recent meeting with Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and his aides.
Franken invited Corker to his office to discuss an op-ed that Corker penned in a Tennessee newspaper opposing an amendment Franken offered to a defense bill. The measure gave the employees of defense contractors who suffer rape or sexual assault at the workplace the right to sue in court.
The meeting quickly deteriorated when Franken began berating one of Corker’s aides, according to GOP aides familiar with the incident. Franken’s sally was so harsh that Corker told Franken to lay off his aide and direct the comments at him instead.
Franken’s tough approach came as a surprise because Corker scheduled the meeting to mend fences after Franken confronted him about the op-ed during an angry exchange on the Senate floor.
Another GOP staffer, an aide to a Senate Republican leader, found herself at the sharp end of Franken’s wit at a recent reception in the Senate’s Mansfield Room. The tongue-lashing took place at an event to celebrate the swearing-in of GOP Sen. George LeMieux (Fla.).
After the conversation began ordinarily, Franken started to grill the aide about what he sees as the failings of the GOP. Franken demanded to know why it had become the "Party of No" and had exaggerated facts in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, according to another GOP leadership aide.
A spokeswoman for Franken declined to comment on either exchange.
The aide emphasized Franken's accomplishments during his short time in the Senate.
"Sen. Franken is always looking for ways to work with his colleagues to make people's lives better and get things done for Minnesota," said spokeswoman Casey Aden-Wansbury.
"He has built good working relationships with colleagues on both sides of the aisle — half the bills he has introduced have Republican co-sponsors. Sen. Franken is pleased that two of his bills have already been signed into law — and that both passed with bipartisan support," she said.
The incidents with GOP staff have reminded some Senate observers of a mocking interaction Franken had with a conservative student, Peter Fritz, at Carleton College during his Senate campaign. After learning of Fritz’s political orientation, Franken pressed him to defend Reaganomics and mimicked his speech patterns, according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune.
Aden-Wansbury vigorously denied that Franken made fun of Fritz and claimed that element of the report was inaccurate.
“There is a war within Al Franken,” said Lawrence Jacobs, a professor of political science at the University of Minnesota. “The Al Franken head tells him to steer away from the limelight and build his reputation. Then there is his heart, which is quite fiery."
Jacobs said Franken must be careful not to engage in too many political brawls, or it could “reinforce for independent voters what they feared about him, that he’s a hot-headed partisan.”
’
Franken has not just confronted GOP aides at private meetings; he has also mixed it up with Republican colleagues in public on the Senate floor.
In addition to chewing out Corker over the op-ed, earlier this month Franken clashed loudly with Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) on the Senate floor. The dust-up was spurred by Thune’s claim that Democratic healthcare legislation would impose new taxes immediately but fail to implement benefits for several years.
Franken derided Thune’s floor presentation and implied that he had fabricated some of his facts, a more personal confrontation than usual in the clubby Senate. An irate Thune walked off the Senate floor after Franken revealed a private conversation they had on the topic.
“I asked if he mentioned any of the benefits that do kick in [immediately] and he said, ‘Uh no,’ ” Franken said in front of C-SPAN television cameras.
“We are entitled to our own opinions; we’re not entitled to our own facts,” Franken said, raising his voice. “Benefits kick in right away, and if you’re going to hold up a chart that says when taxes kick in and when benefits kick in … you better include the benefits that do kick in right away.”
Franken later apologized to Thune.
And last week, Franken cut off Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) during his speech on the Senate floor. Lieberman, who has drawn the ire of liberals over his opposition to the public health insurance option, asked for an additional moment to finish remarks about amendments he planned to offer, but Franken, who was presiding over the Senate, refused to grant the routine request.
"In my capacity as the senator from Minnesota, I object," Franken said.
"Really?" replied Lieberman.
A spokeswoman for Franken said that the senator was just trying to move along with the legislation, but at a press conference late last week, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) expressed disgust with Franken, saying that Lieberman's request for more time to extend his remarks was "objected to by the newest member of the United States Senate in a most brusque way ... We've got to stop this kind of behavior. I have never seen anything like that and I hope that I don't see it again."
An aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) confirmed to reporters the leader asked colleagues presiding over the chamber to strictly enforce a 10-minute speaking rule.
And Democrats note that despite his criticism, McCain did the same thing to a colleague in 2002 when he objected to former Sen. Mark Dayton’s (D-Minn.) request for an additional 30 seconds of floor time during the Iraq War debate.
These incidents have pulled Franken away from his stated goal of modeling his early career in the Senate on former Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), who made a point of proving herself as a “workhorse,” in Senate parlance, and who teamed up often with Republicans.
Franken’s sharp-elbowed exchanges have come in moments of passion. By all appearances, he has worked to keep partisan outbursts to a minimum, knowing that what may draw listeners to Air America does not play well in the buttoned-down Senate.
He has stayed off national cable shows such as "Countdown with Keith Olbermann" and "The Rachel Maddow Show" to avoid appearing as a celebrity liberal spokesman instead of a hard-working senator from Minnesota.
Franken stayed away from the popular liberal blog Daily Kos until this past weekend, when he submitted a measured defense of his decision to vote for Senate healthcare reform legislation.
Franken, who has shared a lot of his time with Minnesota media outlets, has kept the national press at arm’s length. He participated in his first national conference call over the weekend. The call with colleagues did not, however, push political hot buttons. Instead, it focused on consumer protections in the healthcare bill.
And he has wooed a significant number of Republican colleagues to cooperate on legislative initiatives.
For example, he introduced the Service Dogs for Veterans Act with Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.); a diabetes prevention amendment with Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.); a bill to assist the victims of sexual assault with Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah); and the Compassionate Care for Servicewomen Act with Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine).
But even while Franken has tried to focus on sober policy issues, he has at times become embroiled in heated political debates inadvertently, his defenders say.
This happened with the so-called “anti-rape” amendment Franken offered to a defense bill. The measure barred the government from doing business with contractors that required employees to settle rape and sexual assault charges through arbitration instead of the courts.
The amendment was popular enough to attract 68 votes in the Senate, but it quickly became a political football when liberals used it to attack 30 Republican lawmakers who opposed it.
Liberal comic Jon Stewart slammed Republican opponents on his talk show, and other critics set up a fake website, RepublicansForRape.org, something that did not endear Franken to some of his conservative colleagues.
“It’s partly because Franken’s on a 24/7 watch,” said Jacobs of the University of Minnesota. “Even when he’s not intending to go public, he’s finding himself in the media spotlight.”
---
This story was updated at 12:59 p.m.
racehorse
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2009/ ... shape.html
December 23, 2009
Bachmann in Good Shape
Despite her polarizing status, Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) is popular within her district, a new Public Policy Polling survey ( http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/ ... N_1222.pdf )shows.
Bachmann's approval rating is 53%, with 41% disapproving. She leads both potential challengers by more than 15 points.
December 23, 2009
Bachmann in Good Shape
Despite her polarizing status, Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) is popular within her district, a new Public Policy Polling survey ( http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/ ... N_1222.pdf )shows.
Bachmann's approval rating is 53%, with 41% disapproving. She leads both potential challengers by more than 15 points.
racehorse
I think William Daley's (Richard J. Daley's son and Richard M. Daley's brother) advice for the Democratic party is quite sound. I also suspect it will be routinely ignored to the party's peril as he warns. 
--
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 39_pf.html
Keep the Big Tent big
By William M. Daley
Thursday, December 24, 2009; A15
The announcement by Alabama Rep. Parker Griffith that he is switching to the Republican Party is just the latest warning sign that the Democratic Party -- my lifelong political home -- has a critical decision to make: Either we plot a more moderate, centrist course or risk electoral disaster not just in the upcoming midterms but in many elections to come.
Rep. Griffith's decision makes him the fifth centrist Democrat to either switch parties or announce plans to retire rather than stand for reelection in 2010. These announcements are a sharp reversal from the progress the Democratic Party made starting in 2006 and continuing in 2008, when it reestablished itself as the nation's majority party for the first time in more than a decade. That success happened for one major reason: Democrats made inroads in geographies and constituencies that had trended Republican since the 1960s. In these two elections, a majority of independents and a sizable number of moderate Republicans joined the traditional Democratic base to sweep Democrats to commanding majorities in Congress and to bring Barack Obama to the White House.
These independents and Republicans supported Democrats based on a message indicating that the party would be a true Big Tent -- that we would welcome a diversity of views even on tough issues such as abortion, gun rights and the role of government in the economy.
This call was answered not just by voters but by a surge of smart, talented candidates who came forward to run and win under the Democratic banner in districts dominated by Republicans for a generation. These centrists swelled the party's ranks in Congress and contributed to Obama's victories in states such as Indiana, North Carolina, Virginia, Colorado and other Republican bastions.
But now they face a grim political fate. On the one hand, centrist Democrats are being vilified by left-wing bloggers, pundits and partisan news outlets for not being sufficiently liberal, "true" Democrats. On the other, Republicans are pounding them for their association with a party that seems to be advancing an agenda far to the left of most voters.
The political dangers of this situation could not be clearer.
Witness the losses in New Jersey and Virginia in this year's off-year elections. In those gubernatorial contests, the margin of victory was provided to Republicans by independents -- many of whom had voted for Obama. Just one year later, they had crossed back to the Republicans by 2-to-1 margins.
Witness the drumbeat of ominous poll results. Obama's approval rating has fallen below 49 percent overall and is even lower -- 41 percent -- among independents. On the question of which party is best suited to manage the economy, there has been a 30-point swing toward Republicans since November 2008, according to Ipsos. Gallup's generic congressional ballot shows Republicans leading Democrats. There is not a hint of silver lining in these numbers. They are the quantitative expression of the swing bloc of American politics slipping away.
And, of course, witness the loss of Rep. Griffith and his fellow moderate Democrats who will retire. They are perhaps the truest canaries in the coal mine.
Despite this raft of bad news, Democrats are not doomed to return to the wilderness. The question is whether the party is prepared to listen carefully to what the American public is saying. Voters are not re-embracing conservative ideology, nor are they falling back in love with the Republican brand. If anything, the Democrats' salvation may lie in the fact that Republicans seem even more hell-bent on allowing their radical wing to drag the party away from the center.
All that is required for the Democratic Party to recover its political footing is to acknowledge that the agenda of the party's most liberal supporters has not won the support of a majority of Americans -- and, based on that recognition, to steer a more moderate course on the key issues of the day, from health care to the economy to the environment to Afghanistan.
For liberals to accept that inescapable reality is not to concede permanent defeat. Rather, let them take it as a sign that they must continue the hard work of slowly and steadily persuading their fellow citizens to embrace their perspective. In the meantime, liberals -- and, indeed, all of us -- should have the humility to recognize that there is no monopoly on good ideas, as well as the long-term perspective to know that intraparty warfare will only relegate the Democrats to minority status, which would be disastrous for the very constituents they seek to represent.
The party's moment of choosing is drawing close. While it may be too late to avoid some losses in 2010, it is not too late to avoid the kind of rout that redraws the political map. The leaders of the Democratic Party need to move back toward the center -- and in doing so, set the stage for the many years' worth of leadership necessary to produce the sort of pragmatic change the American people actually want.
--
The writer was secretary of commerce in the Clinton administration and chairman of Al Gore's 2000 presidential campaign.
--
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 39_pf.html
Keep the Big Tent big
By William M. Daley
Thursday, December 24, 2009; A15
The announcement by Alabama Rep. Parker Griffith that he is switching to the Republican Party is just the latest warning sign that the Democratic Party -- my lifelong political home -- has a critical decision to make: Either we plot a more moderate, centrist course or risk electoral disaster not just in the upcoming midterms but in many elections to come.
Rep. Griffith's decision makes him the fifth centrist Democrat to either switch parties or announce plans to retire rather than stand for reelection in 2010. These announcements are a sharp reversal from the progress the Democratic Party made starting in 2006 and continuing in 2008, when it reestablished itself as the nation's majority party for the first time in more than a decade. That success happened for one major reason: Democrats made inroads in geographies and constituencies that had trended Republican since the 1960s. In these two elections, a majority of independents and a sizable number of moderate Republicans joined the traditional Democratic base to sweep Democrats to commanding majorities in Congress and to bring Barack Obama to the White House.
These independents and Republicans supported Democrats based on a message indicating that the party would be a true Big Tent -- that we would welcome a diversity of views even on tough issues such as abortion, gun rights and the role of government in the economy.
This call was answered not just by voters but by a surge of smart, talented candidates who came forward to run and win under the Democratic banner in districts dominated by Republicans for a generation. These centrists swelled the party's ranks in Congress and contributed to Obama's victories in states such as Indiana, North Carolina, Virginia, Colorado and other Republican bastions.
But now they face a grim political fate. On the one hand, centrist Democrats are being vilified by left-wing bloggers, pundits and partisan news outlets for not being sufficiently liberal, "true" Democrats. On the other, Republicans are pounding them for their association with a party that seems to be advancing an agenda far to the left of most voters.
The political dangers of this situation could not be clearer.
Witness the losses in New Jersey and Virginia in this year's off-year elections. In those gubernatorial contests, the margin of victory was provided to Republicans by independents -- many of whom had voted for Obama. Just one year later, they had crossed back to the Republicans by 2-to-1 margins.
Witness the drumbeat of ominous poll results. Obama's approval rating has fallen below 49 percent overall and is even lower -- 41 percent -- among independents. On the question of which party is best suited to manage the economy, there has been a 30-point swing toward Republicans since November 2008, according to Ipsos. Gallup's generic congressional ballot shows Republicans leading Democrats. There is not a hint of silver lining in these numbers. They are the quantitative expression of the swing bloc of American politics slipping away.
And, of course, witness the loss of Rep. Griffith and his fellow moderate Democrats who will retire. They are perhaps the truest canaries in the coal mine.
Despite this raft of bad news, Democrats are not doomed to return to the wilderness. The question is whether the party is prepared to listen carefully to what the American public is saying. Voters are not re-embracing conservative ideology, nor are they falling back in love with the Republican brand. If anything, the Democrats' salvation may lie in the fact that Republicans seem even more hell-bent on allowing their radical wing to drag the party away from the center.
All that is required for the Democratic Party to recover its political footing is to acknowledge that the agenda of the party's most liberal supporters has not won the support of a majority of Americans -- and, based on that recognition, to steer a more moderate course on the key issues of the day, from health care to the economy to the environment to Afghanistan.
For liberals to accept that inescapable reality is not to concede permanent defeat. Rather, let them take it as a sign that they must continue the hard work of slowly and steadily persuading their fellow citizens to embrace their perspective. In the meantime, liberals -- and, indeed, all of us -- should have the humility to recognize that there is no monopoly on good ideas, as well as the long-term perspective to know that intraparty warfare will only relegate the Democrats to minority status, which would be disastrous for the very constituents they seek to represent.
The party's moment of choosing is drawing close. While it may be too late to avoid some losses in 2010, it is not too late to avoid the kind of rout that redraws the political map. The leaders of the Democratic Party need to move back toward the center -- and in doing so, set the stage for the many years' worth of leadership necessary to produce the sort of pragmatic change the American people actually want.
--
The writer was secretary of commerce in the Clinton administration and chairman of Al Gore's 2000 presidential campaign.
racehorse
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing- ... f-together
McConnell: Democrats 'all joined hands and walked of the cliff together'
By Kim Hart - 12/27/09
10:19 AM ET
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Sunday that "the new administration and Congress has squandered their political good will" in passing "Obamacare" and that it will be a political thorn in the sides of Democrats in 2010.
"They all joined hands and walked of the cliff together," McConnell said of Democrats. "There is no question that this bill will be a big if not central issue in 2010....Every single Republican opposed the measure."
McConnell also indicated that Republicans would likely campaign on repealing any healthcare reform measure.
He added, "This administration has run up more debt in its first year than the previous administration did in the past 4 years."
McConnell: Democrats 'all joined hands and walked of the cliff together'
By Kim Hart - 12/27/09
10:19 AM ET
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Sunday that "the new administration and Congress has squandered their political good will" in passing "Obamacare" and that it will be a political thorn in the sides of Democrats in 2010.
"They all joined hands and walked of the cliff together," McConnell said of Democrats. "There is no question that this bill will be a big if not central issue in 2010....Every single Republican opposed the measure."
McConnell also indicated that Republicans would likely campaign on repealing any healthcare reform measure.
He added, "This administration has run up more debt in its first year than the previous administration did in the past 4 years."
racehorse