Open Wisconsin Thread
[ Posted Tuesday, June 5th, 2012 – 17:57 UTC ]
I'm putting together column re-runs for the next week here, but I am bowing to popular pressure and declaring what could be a first for this site -- and actual open thread, to discuss the Wisconsin election results. Have at it...
Michale -
Don't say I never did anything for you. Heh.
-CW
What am I, chopped liver?
Walker. YAY! Dying to see what the final tally turns out to be. It'll be interesting to see what happens to the Senate, too.
Are you having fun in Maine, Chris? It stopped raining in NY for a day.
walker pulling it out was altogether expected, but still very bad. the money advantage was overwhelming, something like ten to one, and walker was able to sell his budget spin. that's what it was, too, spin. if you look at ALL the numbers, walker's policies have not actually had much real-life impact either way on the number of jobs, much less the number of good jobs with pension and health insurance. this is not to say they won't, because taking away bargaining rights will free up a lot of money that is currently still paid to teachers, nurses, social workers and other state employees.
not that barrett would necessarily have been much better, which is part of the problem. anti-union money dominates both parties, and the public tends to conflate union leadership with union membership. just because most unions happen to support the democratic party (who the heck knows why anymore), doesn't mean their members are somehow less deserving of the right to bargain for fair pay and working conditions.
Chris1962 -
Packing to head to RI now. At 5:30 PM -- one half hour before the Venus transit, a magic hole opened up in the cloud cover, and I actually GOT TO SEE about 45 minutes of the event. My wife had packed viewers, so we were able to look right at it, which was pretty darn cool.
Anyway, gotta go pack, it's been miserable weather, but it doesn't matter because it cleared for precisely the hour it really needed to!
-CW
@CW,
Have a safe trip!
~joshua
CW,
Don't say I never did anything for you. Heh.
Touche' :D
Interesting take on what Wisconsin means to the rest of the country...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/billfrezza/2012/06/05/governor-walkers-victory-spells-doom-for-public-sector-unions/
When you get past the partisan rhetoric, the facts are quite interesting. And damning for Unions..
Joshua,
and the public tends to conflate union leadership with union membership.
That's an important distinction that everyone (myself included) would do well to remember. Union members are as much, if not MORE, a victim of Unions than non-Union members.
"You assume that a bad system is made up of bad people. You forget that greed and power abuse the closest people first. One’s own people."
-T'Cael, STAR TREK: Final Frontier
doesn't mean their members are somehow less deserving of the right to bargain for fair pay and working conditions.
True...
But those workers need to learn to bargain for those things with an eye on how their benefits will affect everyone else...
If that can't bargain in good faith, without looking at the bigger picture, then they lose that right/privilege to bargain.
It's human nature to want to look out for one's own agenda and ignore anything beyond one's own sphere of existence. But it's an urge that must be fought..
If not then, as we saw in Wisconsin, changes will be made..
Michale.....
http://twitchy.com/2012/06/06/kill-scott-walker-angry-libs-flood-twitter-with-death-threats-after-wisconsin-recall-defeat/
Looks like the Hysterical Left is staying true to form... :^/
Michale.....
American voters unequivocally want ordinary working people crushed under the plutocracy.
The solution isn't to try to change government policy away from the clear will of the electorate. It's to change the will of the electorate. That can happen in two ways: change the minds of existing voters, or change who actually votes. Almost all the big shifts in the history of US policy have come from the latter. In the early days of the republic, the big deal was extending the franchise from adult white males who meet property qualifications to all adult white males.
American voters unequivocally want ordinary working people crushed under the plutocracy.
Assumes facts not in evidence..
It could as easily be said that American voters are tired of the orgasmic spending of our elected leaders and will elect those who say they will get that spending under control and re-elect and elect again those who succeed in doing that.
THAT statement is at least supported by the facts..
The solution isn't to try to change government policy away from the clear will of the electorate. It's to change the will of the electorate. That can happen in two ways: change the minds of existing voters, or change who actually votes. Almost all the big shifts in the history of US policy have come from the latter. In the early days of the republic, the big deal was extending the franchise from adult white males who meet property qualifications to all adult white males.
Can't argue with the logic here..
Unfortunately, changing who votes is akin to cheating. If you can't change the minds of the existing voters with your platform, maybe it's the platform that's the problem and not the minds of the voters...
Michale.....
and the public tends to conflate union leadership with union membership.
That's an important distinction that everyone (myself included) would do well to remember. Union members are as much, if not MORE, a victim of Unions than non-Union members.
"You assume that a bad system is made up of bad people. You forget that greed and power abuse the closest people first. One’s own people."
-T'Cael, STAR TREK: Final Frontier
On the other hand, more often than not, we get the leadership we deserve..
Just as the black community shares some culpability for allowing themselves to be represented by racist scumbags like Sharpton and Jackson, Union members share responsibility for having the greedy power-hungry leadership of the Unions...
Michale......
It's rather ironic..
Hardly ANYONE on the Left likes what "Democracy Looks Like" today....
Hmmmmmmm
Wonder why?? :D
Michale.......
The two most interesting pieces of information which you won't find in the "liberal media":
1.
State Senate - District 21 - Special General
60 of 60 Precincts Reporting - 100%
Name Party Votes Vote %
Lehman, John Dem 36,255 51%
Wanggaard, Van (i) GOP 35,476 49%
This mean Democrats won back the State Senate.
2. 10 percent of exit poll voters said you should never have a recall election for any reason. 60 percent said they were only appropriate for official misconduct.
I hadn't realized that this was the conservative strategy for winning the election until a friend of mine told me he didn't believe in recall elections and I started asking him about it. After a little bit of research, I realized this was the conservative messaging.
What this means ...
The election wasn't about Walker or his policies. Conservatives turned it into a referendum on recall elections. Walker or his policies are not any more popular than he was before the election (despite all the B.S. and spin you hear in the corporate media)
http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/06/opinion/bennett-walker-victory/index.html
BTW ... Bill Bennett? Really CNN? You used to be a news network, not a conservative hack shop
-David
This mean Democrats won back the State Senate.
The question will be, however, will they have the testicular fortitude to use it..
My guess is they will be VERY shy about using their majority, least THEY be replaced in November..
The election wasn't about Walker or his policies.
This election WAS about Walker and his policies. Until the time that Democrats started losing..
Then it became about something else.. :D
Michale.....
From your link...
The public sector union machine, once a colossus of Democratic power, looks weak in the wake of Walker's triumph. ***With mandatory union dues now extinct, union membership has withered in Wisconsin. AFSCME's Local 24 in Madison has seen its ranks drop from 22,300 to 7,100, while AFSCME's statewide membership has been cut in half.*** In short, Walker has broken the long running cycle of handoffs and paybacks between union leadership and state politicians. emphasis mine...
And THAT is why the Unions are so pissed... It's all about money and power..
And now the Unions have a LOT less of both...
Michale...
Now, THIS is really REALLY depressing...
R.I.P. Ray Bradbury, Author of Fahrenheit 451 and The Martian Chronicles
http://io9.com/5916175/rip-ray-bradbury-author-of-fahrenheit-451-and-the-martian-chronicles?utm_campaign=socialflow_io9_twitter&utm_source=io9_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow
:^(
A sad day for all.. One of the giants is lost to us..
Michale.....
A sad day for all.. One of the giants is lost to us.
Indeed ... I grew up on Ray Bradbury, Isaac Asimov, and Robert Heinlein ... the holy trinity of science fiction of my youth
-David
Indeed ... I grew up on Ray Bradbury, Isaac Asimov, and Robert Heinlein ... the holy trinity of science fiction of my youth
And then some... He will be missed..
Michale.....
And THAT is why the Unions are so pissed... It's all about money and power.
More people than that should be pissed though.
Why?
Because the conservative agenda is lower pay, less benefits, and more work. Going after the unions is just one part of this agenda.
-David
Because the conservative agenda is lower pay, less benefits, and more work.
And the liberal agenda is higher pay, more benefits and less work..
The problem is, the country simply CANNOT afford that any more...
So, we either go with the conservative agenda or we go the way of Greece...
What's the lesser of the two evils??
Michale......
Look at it like a family of four with an honest to goodness money tree... The money tree puts out x,xxx.00 dollars a month.
The family starts out living within those means. But, the long for the high life, so they slowly begin start living beyond their current means. So they take more and more from the money tree..
The money tree CAN handle this but, unbeknownst to the family, for every extra dollar they take per month, it shortens the lifespan of the tree...
So the family keeps increasing their spending higher and higher.
"Who cares!??", they say. "We have money tree!!!"
Now, what happens when the money tree dies and there is no more money for the family who, by this time is burning thru money at an orgasmic rate???
The family is the American people and the money tree are the rich taxpayers...
What happens to the family now???
Michale.....
The family is the American people and the money tree are the rich taxpayers...
Actually, the "family" is our GOVERNMENT, not the American people...
Michale.....
Don't take my word for anything..
Listen to a progressive...
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Facing-Facts-in-Wisconsin-by-Dave-Lindorff-120606-32.html
Money had little to do with Walker's win...
Michale.....
akadjian: This mean Democrats won back the State Senate.
They won a Senate that's adjourned 'til November. And half the Senate is up for reelection, so the whole thing starts all over again.
Was the recall worth it? You folks ended up making a superstar out of Walker; gave him a place in the history books as the first governor NOT to lose a recall; weakened the crap out of the public unions; strengthened the resolve of every Republican governor in this nation; energized the Right better than Romney ever could have done; and won the majority of an adjourned Senate.
Not the shrewdest strategic thinking and planning I've ever seen go down.
Look at it like a family of four with an honest to goodness money tree... The money tree puts out x,xxx.00 dollars a month.
Your analogy is decent but a country is quite different from a family.
A country consists of people and businesses.
A good government would look to balance the needs of all of its constituents.
It would serve its people and businesses.
What you are proposing is a government that serves only the needs of business.
A government that fights with businesses to reduce people's wages, to lower their benefits, and to make them work more.
A government that fights to make our country look more like China.
There are much better ways. I see no reason why our government should be fighting to give businesses what they want- cheap labor- and not fighting for what is best for everyone.
-David
"By the people and for the people ..."
ended up making a superstar out of Walker; gave him a place in the history books as the first governor NOT to lose a recall; weakened the crap out of the public unions; strengthened the resolve of every Republican governor in this nation; energized the Right better than Romney ever could have done;
Well, when ya say it like THAT, it sounds so bad.... :D
Seriously, I have to agree... It's always best to choose your battles...
"{They} chose...... poorly"
-Knight, INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE
Michale.....
Michale.....
You folks ended up making a superstar out of Walker; gave him a place in the history books as the first governor NOT to lose a recall; weakened the crap out of the public unions; strengthened the resolve of every Republican governor in this nation; energized the Right better than Romney ever could have done; and won the majority of an adjourned Senate.
Well if you want to armchair quarterback it, Chris ... :)
Whether all those things you say about Walker and the Right are true (as I mentioned, the exit polling indicated this is more of a referendum on recalls than Walker), when it comes to tactics, I believe you make some excellent points.
I would argue for a much more proactive strategy. Recalls are a very reactive strategy.
-David
Michale: Well, when ya say it like THAT, it sounds so bad.... :D
LOL. Y'know what it always boils down to, with the liberals? Poor strategic planning. They're very evidently neglecting the most important step of all, which is to lay out the worst-case scenario and factor that into the decision-making process. I keep seeing this same mistake being made time and time again. It's like they're so steeped in denial that they can't even IMAGINE a worst-case scenario much less roll it into the planning process.
Ray Bradbury's gone?
Man, that's a bummer. He was a giant of the genre. He will indeed be missed.
My favorite short story of his: "There Will Come Soft Rains" from the Martian Chronicles. I'm still waiting for a house like that... along with my flying car, of course...
-CW
...as I mentioned, the exit polling indicated this is more of a referendum on recalls than Walker...
The same exit polling that predicted a tight race and, likely, a loooooong night of waiting for the race to be called? Has anyone noticed that the exit polling turned out to be not too terribly reliable? The race was never even remotely tight at any given point, and it was called in 49 minutes.
Point: The exit polling sounds like it was laden with a disproportionate number of enthusiastic Dems. So unless you're eager to spin yourself, I wouldn't be hanging my hat on those exit results.
CW,
My favorite short story of his: "There Will Come Soft Rains" from the Martian Chronicles. I'm still waiting for a house like that... along with my flying car, of course...
My favorite was one that I remember reading in English class at High School in New Jersey...
I honestly don't recall the name, but it was about a martian lady who was having a dream about a tall dark stranger that looked really different appearing and having an affair with her. It turns out her dream was precognitive and her husband, in a jealous rage, shot and killed the Earthman, just as he landed...
My English teacher commented on the irony of an Earthman journeying all the way to Mars and ends up being killed by a jealous husband.. :^)
As to Walker and the recall...
There are several articles about how the MSM favored the Left wing interpretation of the exit polling.. "Tight" and "Close" race were the words of the evening.. But Walker won the race by 7 points.. 2 more than the 2010 election...
Drudge called it 6 hours before the MSM would grudgingly admit defeat....
Again, the irony is delicious... :D
Michale.....
Here's what I mean.. :D
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/06/06/drudge-bests-mainstream-media-again-correctly-calls-wisconsin-recall-
Michale.....
Drudge called it 6 hours before the MSM would grudgingly admit defeat....
confirmation bias. if it had gone the other way, the MSM would likely have been just as late relative to partisan predictions from the left. the way one perceives discrepancies between exit polls and the real count depends completely on one's bias. think florida 2000 or minnesota 2008. if it's one's own preferred side, the MSM is in the other side's pocket. if it's the other side, cue diebold...
~joshua
Chris: At 5:30 PM -- one half hour before the Venus transit, a magic hole opened up in the cloud cover, and I actually GOT TO SEE about 45 minutes of the event.
And liberals think there's no God. See???
Speaking of God, God forgive me, but I thought Bradbury was already dead. Who am I thinking of? Who's the other great that died a couple of years ago?
the way one perceives discrepancies between exit polls and the real count depends completely on one's bias.
Well, you can call it bias..
I prefer to think of it as one more indication that the MSM is in the bag for Democrats and Obama...
The evidence is overwhelming and more is piling up each and every day... :D
Michale.....
Well, you can call it bias..
I prefer to think of it as one more indication that the MSM is in the bag for Democrats and Obama...
I guess that's STILL bias, eh?? :D
It's going to be really interesting to see how the MSM reports news under President Romney..
I am betting that the Obama/Democrat bias will become even MORE blatantly obvious than it is now.. :D
We'll start seeing tons Abu Ghraibs and Gitmos and Torture reports coming out of every MSM orifice..
That's my wager, anyways...
Michale.....
"ultimately journalism has changed … partisanship is very much a part of journalism now."
-CBS Chief Les Moonves
Straight from the horse's mouth....
Michale.....
michale,
i've given up trying to repeat myself to you about the nature of the system. if you refuse to acknowledge the utter chaos that characterizes MSM reporting, i can't force you to stop operating under the assumption that it behaves (or ever did behave) rationally. of course partisanship is very much a part of it though. fox proved that partisan news was profitable, and so the networks have tried to find partisans to copy them. that's just business.
but back to wisconsin, i recently read a great article on astroturfing and how the public has been systematically propagandized into supporting ineffective reforms. let me know what you think:
http://dissentmagazine.org/article/?article=4240
~joshua
Noonan: What's Changed After Wisconsin
The Obama administration suddenly looks like a house of cards.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303753904577452793597495290.html
Still another take on what Wisconsin means...
It means Obama is in trouble...
Michale.....
Best quote from that above article...
{President Obama} doesn't go to Wisconsin, where the fight is. He goes to Sarah Jessica Parker's place, where the money is.
That says it all...
We don't have a President right now... We have a candidate....
A candidate who simply cannot be bothered with leading.. How could he!? He has an election to win..
Everything else, ANYTHING else... simply doesn't exist...
Michale.....
Ah, you beat me to the Peggy Noonan article, Michale. Good article.
Doug Schoen was interviewed by the Wall St. Journal and had some interesting things to say about the "screwed up" exit polls: http://online.wsj.com/video/opinion-could-obama-lose-wisconsin/508F3F1E-3FD8-45DA-A321-F5B2C54D5732.html
michale,
noonan's article, though i disagree with most of it, is very well-written and speaks to a very real perception of the president. exactly like bush, obama seems to have governed in a way that considers political goals before policy goals. that's a winning argument for the republicans, and obama will have to work hard to fight it. it's also valid to say that wisconsin signals the beginning of the end of union monetary power as a staple for funding statewide and national elections. as democrats abandon them for bigger money donors, labor may have no choice but to re-tool and be more selective about their battles.
however, it's a huge stretch to say that wisconsin somehow does not speak to the increasing power of organized money. there's a technological component to that too. money has a bigger impact now than it did twenty years ago, not just because the people using the money are better organized, but because it is now much easier for someone with enough money to target and turn out voters they don't know. relative to technology and money combined, "people power" isn't that powerful anymore. big money now has the skills and resources both to win big elections and to play political "small ball," which influences voter perceptions.
Joshua,
i've given up trying to repeat myself to you about the nature of the system. if you refuse to acknowledge the utter chaos that characterizes MSM reporting, i can't force you to stop operating under the assumption that it behaves (or ever did behave) rationally. of course partisanship is very much a part of it though. fox proved that partisan news was profitable, and so the networks have tried to find partisans to copy them. that's just business.
It's interesting that you automatically assume that FNC is biased Right, but cannot contemplate that all the other news organizations are also biased to the Left..
It's especially ironic because, from all available evidence, FNC is the ONLY news organization of the MSM that puts up Left wing commentary and opinions..
Did you ever see a Right Wing pundit on MSNBC that wasn't there solely for target practice??
but back to wisconsin, i recently read a great article on astroturfing and how the public has been systematically propagandized into supporting ineffective reforms. let me know what you think:
That's a really long article. I have to admit, my eyes kind of glazed over at the end. :D
I get your point.. But I firmly believe that all the money in the world won't help if you can't convince the people (ANY people) of the validity of your message...
There are at least two sides to every issue.. Money will definitely HELP get a specific side more exposure..
But will it, in and of itself, swing an election or a vote??
I don't think so..
Money helps you get your message out.. But if your message doesn't resonate with the voters, then all the money in the world won't help..
In Wisconsin, it's ludicrous to think that money was the ONLY factor in the Union's loss..
Unions used the same tactics that Team Walker used..
Team Walker just did it better...
Michale.....
What I am trying to say is that, in and of itself, money can't BUY an election.
But lack of it surely can LOSE one, I'll grant you that...
Michale.....
It's interesting that you automatically assume that FNC is biased Right, but cannot contemplate that all the other news organizations are also biased to the Left...Did you ever see a Right Wing pundit on MSNBC that wasn't there solely for target practice??
fox is run like a tight ship, and that makes it unique. no other organization that purports to report "news" has the level of top-down partisan organizational control that fox does. reporters who have left fox describe the partisan micro-management of news content in a way that nobody from any other network ever has ever done successfully. what makes fox the only fully partisan network isn't that there are partisans in the system trying to control the news, it's that the system is orderly enough for them to succeed.
to answer your last question, tucker carlson used to have his own show (not a show where he was someone else's whipping boy), and joe scarborough still does have his own show. they may not be rabidly right-wing, but they were not there just to be abused, and no one will ever mistake either one for being left of center. msnbc puts on prime-time shows in fox's model and targeted for lefty viewers, but the overall organization (and therefore the rest of its programming) is the same sort of chaos that networks have always been. their whole weekend line-up is nothing but crime and prison documentary, which is neither news nor opinion. the moving components of the melange are more lefties than righties, but the organization itself does not compare.
Here's an article that talks about the Netroots Nation meeting going on:
Liberals Threaten Not To Vote In November Over Disappointment With Obama
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/06/08/liberals-threaten-not-to-vote-in-november-over-disappointment-with-obama/
Problem: Liberals never follow through with their threats, and Dem pols know it. "Most plan on voting for Obama..."
Problem: Liberals never follow through with their threats, and Dem pols know it. "Most plan on voting for Obama..."
Yea, the Left really steps on their wee-wee by rewarding the bad behavior of their leaders..
The Left, in general, bitches and moans that Democrats don't represent the REAL interests of the Left, yet they turn right around and send them back to Washington over and over...
What are ya gonna do?? I'm the ONLY caterer in town!
-The Flintstones
Michale.....
Michale....
What are ya gonna do?? I'm the ONLY caterer in town!
-The Flintstones
LOL! That's exactly what it boils down to. But liberals are never gonna have credibility with their own public servants until such time as they're willing to make the ultimate sacrifice and actually sit out an election: just pick SOME kind of election and sit it out, JUST ONCE. From that point forward, every Dem candidate will remember "the time liberals didn't show up," and they'll live in stark fear of it occurring again. But until such time as liberals are willing to put their money where their mouth is, they can moan and groan 'til the cows come home, and their representatives are just gonna continue ignoring them, content in the knowledge that there's no price to pay for using their base as their personal doormat.
Frankly, if it becomes brutally apparent at some point that Obama IS gonna lose in November, and liberals have nothing to lose anyway, that would be the time for them to unite behind a big splashy announcement of how they're not gonna back Obama — and then actually follow through with it. No loss, major gain.
Frankly, if it becomes brutally apparent at some point that Obama IS gonna lose in November, and liberals have nothing to lose anyway, that would be the time for them to unite behind a big splashy announcement of how they're not gonna back Obama — and then actually follow through with it. No loss, major gain.
It would change the whole political landscape, to be sure...
One of the biggest problem the Left has is they don't look at long term goals... The Left usually plans to win skirmishes and battles. The vast majority of their planning goes towards those goals..
What usually happens is, while they are patting themselves on the back that they won this battle or that skirmish, they come to discover that the war is lost....
If there is one basic difference between the Left and the Right, it's the Right is usually willing to give up ground in the pursuit of winning the war... The Left fights tooth and nail for every tactical position, thereby allowing the strategic goal move beyond their reach...
Michale.....
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/romney-obama-out-touch_646804.html
Romney is simply BRUTALIZING Obama....
Michale.....
It's interesting that you automatically assume that FNC is biased Right, but cannot contemplate that all the other news organizations are also biased to the Left...
i don't have to assume, there's proof. fox management intentionally and systematically requires uniformly partisan news content of its contributors. daily memos from the top dictate what the news will be and how it will be reported. fox strongly enforces its desired bias by dismissing any employee who produces insufficiently partisan content.
there's no evidence that nbc, cbs, abc or cnn micromanage any substantial percentage of their employees in nearly as complete, proactive or heavy-handed a manner. MSM management is basically reactive; they'll complain if the coverage doesn't jibe with their view of what it should be, but producers are generally free to report what they think is newsworthy, in the manner they think is appropriate. since everyone's opinions on those counts are different, it's total chaos, not a closely monitored, orderly operation like fox.
Frankly, if it becomes brutally apparent at some point that Obama IS gonna lose in November
that course of events is not trending all that likely at the moment, and wisconsin doesn't indicate any major change. it looks like i'm probably voting third party, but then again i'm not exactly a liberal.
~joshua
I have a feeling that June is going to be a VERY bad month to be an Obama Democrat...
Michale....
that course of events is not trending all that likely at the moment,
You sure about that???
Things seem to be unraveling rather badly for Obama...
He is on Defense and he isn't playing it well at all...
Michale.....
He's tied, 45% to 45%, in Colorado. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/colorado/election_2012_colorado_president
He's also tied in Virginia. I'm starting to get the feeling that O is not only gonna lose but badly.
It's simply amazing how Obama is dancing to the GOP's tune..
Obama says this morning that the Private Sector is "doing fine"..
GOP follows that with how "out of touch" Obama is and that Obama must be "on a different planet"...
Obama rushes back to the mic and says, "Well, no the economy is not fine.."blaa blaaa blaaa
If a candidate is spending his time back-pedaling and "clarifying", said candidate is in trouble...
Take a look at the Electoral Map here:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/08/obama-backs-away-from-fine-comment/?hp
Of the nine swing states listed there, Obama will likely get just Nevada...
Granted, we're 5 months away... But, when you consider how far Obama has fallen and that there ain't much good for Obama coming down the road...???
Well, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to put the pieces together....
Michale....
fallen since when? last i checked, approval ratings are in the exact same place they were over two years ago, with relatively little fluctuation since then. summers generally haven't been kind to obama as president, but i doubt most voters would pick romney.
And here's another dead heat, in Michigan: http://www.freep.com/article/20120608/NEWS15/206080332/New-Michigan-poll-Obama-and-Romney-locked-in-dead-heat
nypoet22: fallen since when? last i checked, approval ratings are in the exact same place they were over two years ago...
Yeah, in the 40's. That's not where an incumbent wants to be. Every now and again he'll hit 50, but he never stays there. That's not a good thing. And, now, here are all these dead heats going on in swing states. None of this stuff is a good indicator for O.
Joshua,
fallen since when? last i checked, approval ratings are in the exact same place they were over two years ago, with relatively little fluctuation since then.
I was speaking more of the more recent events..
The crappy JOBS/Unemployment report
Obama claiming Private Sector is "fine" then scrambling to backtrack
The White House leaks on CT actions
Holder going down in flames over Fast/Furious
Wisconsin
Obama's tasteless "joke" about Michelle not going down all the way
States that were sure things for Obama becoming Swing States
Statements from NRN about Liberals staying home...
And so on and so on and so on... ALL of that has happened just within the past week...
summers generally haven't been kind to obama as president, but i doubt most voters would pick romney.
While it's true that Wisconsin gave the GOP a really big boost, it won't change any Left votes... But it WILL energize the GOP base..
And if the Right is energized and the Left stays home...???
Well, once again, no rocket scientist diploma needed...
Michale....
But let's not look to the past.. Let's look to the future..
The SCOTUS ruling on CrapCare
The SCOTUS ruling on AZ v DOJ
Five Jobs/Unemployment reports
Israel/Iran
None of these will likely bode well for the Obama Administration...
The question will likely not be IF Obama's ratings and polls fall..
The question will likely be HOW FAR Obama's ratings and polls will fall..
Michale.....
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/09/us/politics/six-words-from-obama-and-a-barrage-from-republicans.html?_r=1
I can picture Obama saying to his aides, "See!!!??? THIS is why I don't do press conferences!!!"
:D
Michale.....
And so on and so on and so on... ALL of that has happened just within the past week...
Oh and let's not forget Obama surrogate, President Clinton, doing his cheerleading routine for Romney.
Not once...
Not twice....
But THREE TIMES.... Just within the past week...
Obama must be reeling and saying, "Stop the world!! I want to get off!!!"....
Michale.....
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0612/77213.html
I simply cannot believe that ya'all are perfectly OK with this...
It's mind-boggling....
Michale.....
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/09/labor-department-backs-off-plan-forcing-reporters-to-use-government-issued/?test=latestnews
And no red lines here!!!????
Am I in an alternate reality where values have suddenly flipped!??
I expect to wake up and see Spock with a beard....
........
OK, that came out wrong.... :^/
Michale.....
I expect to wake up and see Spock with a beard....
Wouldn't you love to wake up and see Spock standing there? Provided you survived the heart attack, wouldn't that be cool?
Wouldn't you love to wake up and see Spock standing there? Provided you survived the heart attack, wouldn't that be cool?
Cool????
Not sure...
"Disturbing" would probably top the list.. :D
Michale......
that course of events is not trending all that likely at the moment
I'm talking down the road, like September, when we'll know a lot more than we know now. That's when liberals should sieze the moment and make a little history for themselves with their public servants. It'll change the whole party dynamic. Dem pols will be jumping through hoops to please liberals just like we see the Republican leadership doing with the Tea Partiers. They don't make a move without seeing where the TPers stand. That's the positionn liberals should be shooting for.
Michale: Obama rushes back to the mic and says, "...the economy is not fine.."
LOL! Good response, O. Thanks for the bumper sticker.
CW,
I'm talking down the road, like September, when we'll know a lot more than we know now. That's when liberals should sieze the moment and make a little history for themselves with their public servants. It'll change the whole party dynamic. Dem pols will be jumping through hoops to please liberals just like we see the Republican leadership doing with the Tea Partiers. They don't make a move without seeing where the TPers stand. That's the positionn liberals should be shooting for.
I don't think we'll see the Left in general taking any heartfelt actions to show their President et al that they are disappointed in them..
Oh sure, the Left will give lip service to the idea.. "We're gonna stay home!!!" and crap like that..
But, when it comes down to it, the Left will be like docile sheep and baaaa baaaaa all the way to the voting booth...
I may not like many of the actions of the Right in general, but there is simply no denying their commitment to their ideology....
The Left in general has no such backbone...
Present company excepted, of course.. :D
Michale.....
DOH!!!!
That last one should have said CB and now CW..
My bust...
Michale.....
Yeah, in the 40's. That's not where an incumbent wants to be. Every now and again he'll hit 50, but he never stays there. That's not a good thing.
cb,
i never said anything about it being good, that's a value judgment. in truth i'm not sure how i feel about it. if you asked me to rate obama on a scale from 0 to 100, i might very well rate him at exactly 47.5 - that is to say, slightly below average. if you asked me whether the president's rating is good or bad, i'd say that he is where he is because that's precisely the rating he deserves.
however, that's not what i was discussing. i wrote that public approval hadn't changed much. that's just a fact. the last time either approval or disapproval of the president deviated five percentage points away from 47.5 was october of 2009.
~joshua
Joshsua,
however, that's not what i was discussing. i wrote that public approval hadn't changed much. that's just a fact. the last time either approval or disapproval of the president deviated five percentage points away from 47.5 was october of 2009.
What you say is true, as far as it goes..
But you have to admit... The last couple weeks have been devastating for Obama. If nothing happens to counter balance these weeks from hell, it would simply be impossible for Obama's approval ratings to stay where they are..
And, as I have pointed out, there is more bad news on the way before the next Obama Poll Watch commentary..
If Obama's numbers remain constant without any counter-balancing good news, then I would have to say that those Poll numbers are extremely suspect..
Michale.....
Mossad: 'Stuxnet is our baby; Obama disclosed it for his reelection campaign'
http://israelmatzav.blogspot.com/2012/06/mossad-stuxnet-is-our-baby-obama.html
And the hits just keep on comin'!!!
Michale.....
michale,
I have no problem accepting the possibility that all these events may hurt the president's poll numbers. However, it seems like you'd have issues if they didn't. What's so hard to imagine about most people reading the news and assuming whatever negatives come out are just standard political attacks, to be ignored? I'm not saying that's what will happen, but considering how little movement there's been in response to past events, it's not out of the realm of possibility that the numbers stay the same.
-joshua