…That is what the most recent USA Today/Gallup would read like if politics were a sporting event. This score does not really provide us with anything substantive, so we need to break down the game-time statistics instead. For this, I decided to go to The Huffington Post. Keep your friends close, your enemies non-friends closer (in the spirit of civility and the censoring of Huckleberry Finn). This is the equivalent of reading the Washington Post to see how the Cowboys played… nevertheless, I am certain that we can gleam some valuable insight by considering HuffPo’s point-of-view. Here’s how it starts out:
Forty-seven percent of respondents said that they had a favorable view of the GOP, while 43 percent said they had an unfavorable view. Since late in 2005, Gallup has rarely found the party with an unfavorable rating below 50 percent
Now, I am no professional writer. However, I am a graduate of Montgomery County’s public schools, and remember being taught that if you are going to write numbers stick to writing them out or writing the number (forty-seven or 47), but do not mix.
The article points out that Republicans have a 47% Favorable rating, and a 43% Unfavorable rating. Not overly impressive, except when it is mentioned that Republicans carried out a November landslide with worse favorable numbers. The Democrats have a 46% Favorable rating, and 47% Unfavorable one. This isn’t very good for the party that tends to enjoy high favorable marks because, let’s face it, they come across as the bleeding-heart caring type. Everyone is more favorable of the parent that says ‘yes’ all of the time, and never punishes, and is the push-over; while the other parent is the one that really molds your disciplined being. That is what Americans need, they need the disciplinarian.
Despite all of the wonderful information that can be taken from this poll, and all of the analysis that can be done, Huffington Post chooses to live in the past:
As the Gallup poll’s trend data shows, public views of the parties can shift quickly. As recently as May of last year, Gallup found that only 36 percent of Americans had a positive view of the Republican Party while 58 percent had a negative view, for a net rating of -16.
…Really…? Who’s living in the past now? By the way, this was how the article was closed-out. Brava HuffPo!
I am a Cowboys fan… Dallas Cowboys. Let me give you a quick synopsis of what that meant this past year:
Dallas Cowboys start season as Super Bowl contenders, and Jerry Jones hints constantly at looking forward to the Cowboys playing in the Super Bowl at the brand new Texas Stadium (which, of course, is bigger than YOUR stadium).
Dallas Cowboys go 0-2… win 1 game, then lose the next 5.
1-7 for the team that had high hopes. Many wept, Redskins fans rejoiced; we crumbled.
I now get to see what it felt like to be a Skins fan, and watch your rivals crumble under the weight of their own egos and expectations (Well, I got to twice, when the University of Texas precipitously fell to the bottom of the Big 12 South; below Baylor!). Did anyone pay attention to the events of tonight on Capitol Hill?
I am watching the Democratic Party collapse tonight. I’m popping popcorn, drinking a Shiner, and laughing at what I am hearing and reading. Democrats were short of the 60 votes they needed to try and pass the DREAM Act in the Senate, so they shelved it. Bear in mind, it is being placed on hold temporarily because the democrats have before the end of the year to try and legislate themselves some-million votes nation-wide. Nevertheless, a victory for Republicans. Next, Democrats failed to get the 60 votes needed for a procedural motion on the 2011 Defense Authorization Bill, which included the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell provision. Since that failed, Senators have promised to re-introduce a free-standing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell bill on the floor; but this is not exactly a morale booster for Senate Democrats today. Finally, Democrats are none-too-pleased with the President and his reaching across the aisle on the issue of tax cuts. How mad could they be? Well, Rep. Shelley Berkley acknowledged that someone in the Democratic Caucus hissed “F*** the President” as they debated the bill. As Ron White says: there’s some good news. The outcome is that the Democratic Caucus came out and announced their stance on the bill, which follows what was said inside the caucus in the end.
Democrats seemed poised to enter into the wilderness as they relinquish control of the House. Perhaps Sam Tannenhaus will write a book about the death of legislative liberalism? But for right now, kick back and enjoy the new “Best Show on Earth,” because in two years, that might be us again…
It’s around 1900 hours, or 7:00 pm. About the time that everyone sits down to eat dinner after a long day, and many people will have the news on while eating and get caught up on the day’s events. Well, there is something that I wanted to break to any fellow conservative Republicans on this website:
Yes, the woman that ruined the democratic control of the House, and took Congressional approval to levels where the members need a snorkel to breath (that’s 17% approval folks) has been placed back in charge of the Democrats in the House. Ya can’t fix stupid!
OK, I want to admit right off the bat that we here at theLobbyist have been fairly derelict in our duties. This has been an exciting election season, and many of us are caught up in the fervor by campaigning for some of our local guys, or perhaps ypu have noticed that out ConservativeCongress site has blown up recently as people become more and more aware that CC exists to help people identify the conservative Congressional candidates in their district.
So I want to say, I’m sorry.
Here we are on the crest of a wave that is scheduled to level the political landscape in two days and those of us writing at theLobbyist have let you down. Nevertheless, we are going to get up off our rear-ends (and enjoy it when we kick the Democratic establishment onto its rear-end) and get things up here for our readers. Thanks!
The Hill had this article yesterday, showing some substantial financial rewards reaped by vulnerable Democrats after voting for health care reform:
Vulnerable House Democrats who supported the healthcare bill last month reaped big financial rewards.
Federal Election Commission (FEC) reports show the crucial yes votes cashed in between March 21 and the end of the first quarter on March 31. They received big money from Democratic-leaning political action committees (PACs) and fellow Democratic members of Congress.
Several of these members were last-minute yes votes, which helped push the legislation to passage.
Rep. Earl Pomeroy (D-N.D.) raised more than $140,000 from PACs and fellow members in the final 10 days of the quarter — which was more than one-third of the $400,000 total he raised for the entire quarter.
Rep. Scott Murphy (D-N.Y.) raised more than $100,000 from political committees after deciding to vote yes on the bill, and he raised about $475,000 overall.
Reps. Debbie Halvorson (D-Ill.) and Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) weren’t far behind, each raising more than $90,000 from PACs and fellow members of
Congress in the final week-plus of the quarter. Halvorson raised $410,000 total, while Giffords raised nearly $500,000.
Frequent givers included labor unions and left-leaning groups like the Human Rights Campaign PAC. Several liberal members of Congress who championed the bill, including Reps. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) and Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), also rewarded those who voted yes with contributions.
While members flooded each other’s coffers in the final days of the first-quarter fundraising period, House leaders gave little to those who voted no on healthcare reform. In the final week-plus of the quarter, neither Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) nor Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) gave money to any member who voted no.
This, of course, is standard politics- reward those who help you, ditch those who don’t. Heck, it’s standard in life. Still, it’s clear that leading Democrats and liberal groups are a) as big on ideological purity as the Republican Party is accused of, and b) unwilling to look at the longer picture, namely that it’s the Democrats who voted against the law that are the ones Democrats NEED if they want to win consecutive elections, and have a long run at ruining America’s financial future.
Of course, these so-called “conservadems” and “DINOs” will be replaced by relatively moderate Republicans and conservatives in many districts, as the political pendulum swings, and in a year I’ll probably be criticizing RINOs and moderate conservatives as they vote for bad bills. However, given the lack of support from their leadership, and the strength of the conservative movement heading into the midterms…maybe we’ll actually have a conservative House, not just a Republican majority House. At that point, we can start putting good legislation on the table, not just opposing bad legislation.
Last week, my father and I were griping about the size and scope of the federal government, and he noted that the Department of Agriculture is unnecessary. After all, as he said, farmers know what to plant and not plant- something he knows from his many friends and acquaintances in farming, and especially from a farmer he met on a week-long cruise in the Bahamas. Furthermore, farmers know what people want because they follow the commodities markets, not any government official’s advice.
Today, while on the Metro, I ran into a group of students, teachers and chaperones from Missouri visiting DC. In talking to one of the chaperones, it came out that he was a farmer. I asked him about farming, and farming subsidies, and among other things, he said the following:
1. His family has been farming for one hundred years- they don’t need the government telling them what to plant and what not to plant.
2. His family’s farm receives government subsidies to farm in a certain way- but according to the chaperone, he and his family could actually make more money without the subsidies, farming as they wished.
The guy admitted different farms receive more or less money, depending on when they apply, etc. However, when I asked him whether three-quarters of federal farm subsidies go to the largest ten percent of farm companies- something I read recently- he said that sounded about right.
When it comes down to it, this guy verifies what the rest of us know- government subsidies distort markets. Congress needs to get rid of farming subsidies- as well as the entire Department of Agriculture- as soon as possible, both to allow the free market to grow more food more efficiently- remember the higher-than-normal African starvation in 2008, because of high gas prices (and government-subsidized ethanol being used for gas instead of food)- but also to cut the federal budget by over $25 billion. Both Democrats and Republicans in DC say they want to be fiscally responsible…well, this is an easy place to start.
Despite the despondent attitude I had earlier this week, I’m a bit more optimistic after a number of Democratic mistakes on health care reform, as well as the leadership of Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK). Even better, I saw on Fox News this morning that a CBS poll showed the vast majority of Americans want the GOP to repeal the health care reform bill President Obama signed into law. Even better than that, however, is the upcoming ping-pong of the reconciliation bill back to the House. Maybe they can scare a few Democrats into shutting it down. Unlikely, but possible.
Hope springs eternal- I just hope the right is not getting reform fatigue. I know I am. (Though that might be the allergies…)
Democrats rejected an inquiry into the Black Panther voter intimidation case that the Justice Department dropped last year. According to The Washington Times, Judiciary Committee Democrats “described the Philadelphia polling disruption as an “isolated incident” that received sufficient punishment when the New Black Panther Party member who carried a nightstick was barred from carrying weapons at polling places in the future.”
I feel safe now. I really do. So now a probably-violent racist has to attack me with his bare fists instead of a bat, knife or gun. *Wipes brow* I am so relieved.
From The Washington Post’s?The Fix: “Democrats acknowledged privately that Dorgan’s decision was a significant blow although they quickly pivoted to note that the party would field a candidate. The only obvious name for Democrats is Rep. Earl Pomeroy who has held the state’s at-large seat since 1992 when Dorgan ascended to the Senate.”
From the National Republican Senatorial Committee: “”North Dakota was always going to be a competitive seat for the Democrats to defend, and Senator Dorgan?s retirement now provides us with another excellent pick-up opportunity for Republicans in 2010. This development is indicative of the difficult environment and slumping approval ratings that Democrats face as a result of their out of control tax-and-spend agenda in Washington, and we fully intend to capitalize on this opportunity by continuing to recruit strong candidates who can win these seats in November.” – Brian Walsh, NRSC Communications Director”?
This should be really interesting. My uncle is the Chief of Staff for Representative Earl Pomeroy (D-ND),?and so I have a more-than-passing interest in the state’s politics.?My friend Shawn, a resident of North Dakota, is one of many who thinks?governor John?Hoeven is?the strongest candidate for Republicans to run this year. Hopefully, he does, and sends the Democrats a strong message in North Dakota that voting for Democratic initiatives like this health care reform effort is a bad thing. (Both senators?from the state- Dorgen and Conrad- and Pomeroy voted for their respective chamber’s bill.)
Over the last few weeks, there has been talk of not having the traditional “conference” to meld the Senate and House health care reform bills. I laughed off such thoughts, as transparency is something this administration and congressional leaders have been hammered for over the last several months. However, it appears I was wrong. Senate Majority Leader Reid (D-NV) and House Majority Leader Pelosi (D-CA) are setting things up so they will not have to have the conference, and instead get the “conference” bill without a conference.
This is bothersome. However, a number of media sources are doing their job and calling for the Obama administration to open the melding process to the public. (H/T to The Heritage Foundation’s “The Foundry.”) Let’s make our voices heard in support of C-Span’s efforts and make certain Democrats know they should have full transparency in this debate or face the wrath of the voters come November.