Friday, December 23, 2011

2011-- A GOOD year for Obama and the Democrats?


Ezra Klien has an interesting take on how 2011 is playing out for Obama and the Democrats.  With all of its problems, says Klein, 2011 may turn out to have been a really good year for Obama and the Democrats and a really bad year for Republicans.

In particular, says Klein, Republicans have totally failed when it comes to their often stated goal of protecting millionaires from tax increases while obtaining deficit reduction largely or totally through cuts in federal spending, particularly cuts in spending on social programs they detest. 

Four times this year Republicans went head-to-head with the White House and Democrats over using spending cuts to cut the federal deficit instead of raising taxes.  In February they threatened to shut down the government over the issue.  In August, they threatened to not raise the debt ceiling and let the country go into default because of the spending cut/taxes debate.  In November, they demanded that the supercommittee cut the deficit without raising taxes.  And just recently, they have demanded major spending cuts rather than tax increases on millionaires to pay for extending the payroll tax cut and unemployment insurance.  Each time they fell short of their goal. 

Republicans ended the year with their worst-nightmare outcome.  Rather than reducing the deficit through a combination of $4 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax increases, they are ending with the very likely prospect that there will be $4 in taxes increases for every $1 in spending cuts.

This is happening, says Klein, largely because the supercommtteee failed.  “That left two major events on the budgetary horizon: the spending trigger, which cuts $1 trillion from the budget, half of which comes from the Pentagon, and none of which comes from Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare beneficiaries, or assorted other programs for low-income Americans; and the scheduled expiration of the Bush tax cuts, which would raise taxes by almost $4 trillion. Both events are scheduled to happen simultaneously and automatically on January 1, 2013 — a dual-trigger nightmare for the GOP. And taken together, they are far to the left of anything that Democrats have suggested over the past year.”

Klein provides the following chart which compares the Republican-preferred Ryan Budget to five other proposals, each of which Obama was willing to support, with what the Republicans got—the Dual Trigger.  If the Republicans had accepted any of the five proposals Obama could have supported and gotten Democrats to support, the Republicans would have largely achieved their goal.  Millionaires would not pay more taxes and spending on many social programs Republicans hate would have been cut dramatically in the name of deficit reduction.  However, Republicans could never say YES.  Every time they got close to winning, they asked for more.  Ultimately, they lost.  Obama and the Democrats won not because they were so smart but because Republicans were so incapable of accepting victory.  That’s what happens when the ideological extreme takes over a party. 
  Read more here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/obamas-surprisingly-good-2011/2011/08/25/gIQAbjZqDP_blog.html

Thursday, December 22, 2011

UPDATE: Obama projected to win


According to forecasting models tracked by PollyVote, as of today Obama would be expected to win the 2012 with 50.8 % of the popular vote.  Here is the breakdown of the various forecasting models:












Read more about the 2012 general election forecasts and projections from individual models here: http://pollyvote.forecastingprinciples.com/index.php/pollyvote-2012.html

The resurrection of Barack Obama? Could be.


David Gergen at CNN says the payroll tax debacle for the Republicans may just be part of a bigger story.  We may be seeing the resurrection of President Barack Obama and his fellow Democrats heading into the 2012 elections.  Gergen writes:

After the debt ceiling debacle of last summer, the conventional wisdom among many political analysts was that Obama would go the way of President Jimmy Carter, that Republicans would lose a few seats in the House but retain control, and that the GOP would surge into power in the Senate. In short, Republicans were looking for a clean sweep.

Who believes that now? Obama is still highly vulnerable and could lose, but the CNN poll coming out of the field this week reveals a remarkable turnaround, especially in the past month.

In a mid-November survey, when asked which candidate they were more likely to support, registered voters gave Mitt Romney a lead of 4 percentage points over Obama, 51% to 47%. The mid-December survey found an 11-point switch; Obama now has a 52%-45% edge over Romney. Against Newt Gingrich, Obama has a 16-point lead, 56%-40%. (Ironically, the one Republican candidate who does as well against Obama as Romney is Rep Ron Paul, trailing by the same 52%-45% margin.)

Let’s home Gergen is right.



BREAKING NEWS: House caves on Payroll Tax

Boehner is expected to announce that House will vote on the Senate bill soon. Bill is expected to pass.  Two-month deal appears to be done.  House Republicans couldn't take the heat.

Don't miss this

Whatever you do don't miss viewing this slide show from Vanity Fair

Go here and click on the red arrows to see the show.  http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2011/12/republican-pin-up-calendar-2012#slide=1


Repubs blink, seek face-saving way out

Republicans seem to be floating an idea for ending the dispute over the payroll tax cut extension that would allow Boehner and the Tea Party House Republicans to save face.  The idea is to have a three-month extension instead of the two-month extension in the Senate bill.  Boehner said today that the problem with the two-month extension in the Senate bill is that two-months are "more burdensome" and "costly" for employers because it doesn't match up with the quarterly reporting.  Nonsense?  Yep.  But that's the House Republicans for you.  They have now truly all gone nuts.

Read more here: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/12/22/1047893/-Key-House-Republican-sets-stage-for-Speaker-Boehner-to-beg-for-mercy-on-payroll-tax-cut-extension?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=f


Wednesday, December 21, 2011

The truth about the payroll tax cut disagreement


If you have been watching the news, you are probably totally confused about the argument between Democrats and Republicans in Washington over extending the payroll tax cuts.  Let me try to clarify the situation.  Here is the truth:

Republicans and Democrats AGREE that:
  •  The payroll tax cut should be extended another full year.
  • The payroll tax cut should NOT add to the deficit.

Republicans and Democrats DISAGREE ON the amount of the tax cut

The payroll tax is normally 6.2%.  In 2011, it was reduced to 4.2%.  That reduction is set to expire as of January 1st.  Republicans want the payroll tax for 2012 to 4.2% where it is now.  Democrats want a bigger cut in 2012.  They want to lower the 2012 payroll tax to 3.1%.

Republicans and Democrats DISAGREE ON how to pay for the tax cut. 

The Democrats proposed a 3.25% tax on Gross Income over $1 million to pay for the tax cut.  Republicans opposed taxing millionaires arguing that people who make over $1 million per year are small business “job creators” so that any tax on them would be a “job killer.”  In truth, most millionaires are NOT small business owners.  Less than 1% of small business owners have a gross income over $1 million per year. 

Republicans propose to pay for the tax cut by freezing the pay of federal employees through 2015 and gradually reducing the federal work force by 10 percent. In addition, Senate Republican leaders would go after “millionaires and billionaires,” not by raising their taxes but by making them ineligible for unemployment compensation and food stamps and increasing their Medicare premiums.  Note: Instances of millionaires receiving unemployment compensation and/or food stamps are extremely rare. 

Republicans have added additional poison pill demands that Democrats find unacceptable.  Chief among these are the following:

Republicans want to include a provision to speed construction of the Keystone XL pipeline from oil sands in Alberta, Canada, to the Gulf Coast, something President Obama said that he would reject. The pipeline has generated intense opposition from environmentalists and public officials who claim that it threatens sensitive lands and underground water supplies along its route. Critics also say that the heavy oil extracted from sand formations in Canada will add to climate change and extend American dependence on fossil fuels. Its proponents say that the project would create thousands of jobs and lessen dependence on oil from unstable regions like the Middle East.  In November 2011, the Obama administration moved to delay a decision on the pipeline while it studies an alternate route, effectively pushing any action past the 2012 election.  Republicans want to force the administration to approve the pipeline without competing environmental impact studies required under existing law.  Speculation is that large Republican donors with financial interests in the pipeline are behind this.  Read more about the pipeline here: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/k/keystone_pipeline/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier

Also, Republicans  want to include a measure passed this year in the House that would roll back the Environmental Protection Agency’s rules limiting toxic air pollutants from commercial and industrial boilers, and ban the agency from proposing a new standard in the near future.  Again,  larger Republicans donors are behind this.

WHERE MATTERS STAND NOW

Senate Republicans and Democrats had been unable to reach agreement on the one year extension.  On December 17th, the Senate passed a bill to extend the payroll tax cut for two months by an overwhelming bi-partisan vote of 89 to 10 to avoid an increase in the payroll tax as of January 1st and  to allow time for  further negotiation.   On December 20th, House Republicans voted 229 to 193 to “Disagree” with the Senate and called for establishing a negotiating committee so the two chambers could resolve their differences.  House Republicans are putting pressure on Democrats in the Senate to agree to the pipeline and other demands in exchange for extending the tax cuts for a year.  Additionally, some Republicans don't want to extend the tax cuts at all.  In fact, Democrats have accepted Republican demands with regard to the pipeline and earlier agreed to drop their proposal for a tax on millionaires.  The fact that Democrats in the Senate have been much more willing to compromise than Republicans makes the Republican House demands completely unreasonable. 

So, why are House Republicans being unreasonable?  Republicans in the Senate apparently thought they had the approval of House Speaker John Boehner when it came to the two-month extension and that House agreement to the extension was assured.  They were surprised when Boehner suddenly announced that House Republicans would not accept the extension.  Word from Washington is that Tea Party Republicans rebelled and forced Boehner, who is in danger of losing his position as Speaker, to change his mind and accommodate their demands.  Some Tea Party Republicans are opposed to any extension of the payroll tax cuts.  Speculation is that some of them believe that if the payroll tax cuts are allowed to expire the economy might slip back into a recession and that a bad economy would increase their chances of beating Obama and the Democrats in the next election.  Some economist have said they believe a second recession is likely if the payroll tax cuts are not extended.

Democrats in the Senate have said they will not agree to appoint any negotiators until the House passes the Senate bill for a two month extension. 

WHAT HAPPENS IF NOTHING IS RESOLVED BEFORE JANUARY 1ST?

If nothing changes, payroll taxes for most Americans will go up January 1st.    If that happens:

  • Working Americans will be hit with $120 billion TAX INCREASE in 2012.
  • 122 million American households will be hit with the TAX INCREASE.
  • The average American household will pay $1,426 MORE IN TAXES IN 2012.
  • 1 million+ new jobs that could have been created thanks to an extension and expansion of the payroll tax holiday WILL NOT be created.
  •  98 Percentage of businesses will see their payroll taxes doubled

Tuesday, December 20, 2011

Obama job approval near 50% in new poll


Obama’s job approval rating is currently at the highest level it has been since last summer according to a new Washington Post /ABC News poll.  49% now approve of the job Obama is doing.  That’s the highest level he has achieved since March if you exclude the short-lived bump in the polls he got after killing Osama bin Laden.  Additionally, Americans trust Obama to do a better job than Republicans in Congress when it comes to Protecting the middle class (50% to 35%), Handling taxes (46% to 41%), Handling the economy (44% to 40%), and Creating jobs (44% to 41%).

The Washington Post says Obama’s “rise suggests that the White House’s new tactics in recent months — to adopt a more populist tone and to challenge Republicans aggressively over taxes and income disparities — may be shifting the national political landscape back to Obama’s favor.
And it comes with an outburst of optimism among Democrats, 72 percent of whom now say Obama will win reelection, up from 58 percent who thought so in October. Americans overall believed by a wide margin in October that a Republican would beat Obama next year, but they are evenly split in the new poll.”

Read more:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obamas-approval-up-while-republicansin-congress-flounder/2011/12/19/gIQAqJ7c5O_graphic.html

New Republican primary forecasts

Nate Silver at Five Thirty Eight has updated his forecasts for the initial Republican primaries.  Silver has Paul winning Iowa with Romney carrying New Hampshire.  He has Gingrich leading in South Carolina and Florida.  See the table below and at this link: http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/19/paul-moves-into-lead-in-iowa-forecast/



Republican Primary Projections

Updated Dec. 19, 2011 at 12:45 PM ET
IowaVOTE
PROJECTION
CHANCE
OF WIN
Ron Paul25.7%52%
Mitt Romney21.328
Rick Perry14.17
Full Iowa Details
New HampshireVOTE
PROJECTION
CHANCE
OF WIN
Mitt Romney36.5%75%
Ron Paul19.912
Newt Gingrich19.010
Full New Hampshire Details
South CarolinaVOTE
PROJECTION
CHANCE
OF WIN
Newt Gingrich36.8%Too early
Mitt Romney23.0
Michele Bachmann10.6
Full South Carolina Details
FloridaVOTE
PROJECTION
CHANCE
OF WIN
Newt Gingrich48.4%Too early
Mitt Romney26.4
Ron Paul7.0
Full Florida Details

What happens if payroll tax cut NOT extended

What happens if, as is likely, the House and Senate DO NOT reach an agreement to extend the payroll tax cut for even two months as the Senate bill does?  CQ Roll Call says:

And so what once seemed almost impossible — given the bad economic consequences for so many voters and the potential political peril for all the players — has now become the default setting: A snapback on Jan. 1 to the old Social Security payroll tax rate of 6.2 percent for 160 million workers, which would mean about $20 less a week in the paychecks of people making $50,000 annually; a 27 percent cut in  Medicare payments to doctors; and the end of federal benefits for as many as 1.8 million of the long-term unemployed who have run out the clock on their 99 weeks of benefits. The brightest silver lining at this hour is that there’s precedent in all three cases for the status quo being allowed to expire but then being reinstated retroactively — although if the current impasse lasts longer than a month, that would become logistically much more difficult for payroll firms, the Medicare bureaucracy and the states that administer jobless aid to carry out.


House to take FAKE vote on Senate Payroll Tax cut bill


House Republicans plan to vote to "disagree" with the Senate about the payroll tax cut and call for a House/Senate conference. The vote is on a motion to "Disagree." So if you are in favor of the Senate bill you would vote "NO"--you did not disagree. If you oppose the Senate bill you would vote "YES" you do disagree. But, it doesn't matter which way the vote turns out. Even if 100% of the House voted NO to NOT-disagree, the Senate bill would still NOT become law since the House would NOT have voted on the Senate Bill. This is a FAKE vote that Boehner has brought up to put pressure on the Democrats and give Republicans cover so they can say they never voted NOT to extend the tax cut.  Also, some speculate that Boehner was worried that a dozen or so House Republicans might cross the isle and vote with the Democrats to accept the Senate bill and send it to Obama. It's Washington game playing.  It also puts the income of working Americans at risk and might result in the economy dropping back into a recession. 

And, the idea of calling for a “conference” to work out differences between the House and Senate over funding extending the tax cut a full year is just nonsense.  The Senate bill extends the tax cut for two months precisely to ALLOW the House and Senate time to work out their differences.  The whole thing is stupid, but then we ARE talking about the Republican House.

Monday, December 19, 2011

New National Poll: Newt in further decline


A new Gallup poll shows Newt’s support has declined to the point that he is now basically tied with Romney.  The narrowing of the gap between Gingrich and Romney is almost totally a result of Gingrich LOSING support rather than Romney making any gains.  Gallup says Gingrich’s former supporters have split among the remaining non-Romney candidates with no single candidate receiving a significantly larger share of Gingrich deserters than any other.  Ron Paul is in third place with 11% showing only a slight gain from Newt’s decline.

CNN/Opinion Research (see table below) has Newt and Romney now tied at 28% with Paul at 14%.



















CNN/Opinion Research poll:






House Republicans threaten to INCREASE taxes on workers


The Senate in bi-partisan vote of 89-10 passed a bill to extend the payroll tax cut another two months.  Speaker Boehner immediately said the bill was dead on arrival in the House because it extended the tax cut for only for two months.  Chuck Todd at MSNBC says “One big reason why many House Republicans oppose the two-month extension: It allows the White House and congressional Democrats to continue to push for the popular payroll tax cut after the New Year.  Remember, they have been getting hammered on this back home, and look at the most recent NBC/WSJ poll about which party does a better job at protecting the middle class. Politically, for as much heat as the House GOP is taking on this walk away, perhaps they are right: They can’t afford, politically, to have this issue hanging over their head on Groundhog Day.”  http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/12/19/9556098-first-thoughts-here-we-go-again

So, what are the consequences to working Americans if Republicans block the extension of the payroll tax?  American Progress ran the numbers.

Working Americans will be hit with $120 billion TAX INCREASE in 2012.
122 million American households will be hit with the TAX INCREASE.
The average American household will pay $1,426 MORE IN TAXES IN 2012.
1 million+ new jobs that could have been created thanks to an extension and expansion of the payroll tax holiday WILL NOT be created.
 98 Percentage of businesses will see their payroll taxes doubled.


You may want to write the Republicans in the House and ask them to stop playing political games with the take-home pay of American workers.  And, be sure to keep their behavior in mind when you go to the polls next November.  That’s when you can send them a REAL message.

Ron Paul supporter calls for assassination of President and First family


Libertarian Jules Manson of California who is a supporter of Ron Paul called for the assassination of Obama and all his “monkey” children on Sunday on his Facebook page.  See this link:  http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/12/18/ron-paul-supporter-openly-calls-for-assassination-of-president-obama-on-facebook-page-image/

Manson's Facebook page has been taken down but Addicting Information posted this captured by Americans Against the Tea Party.



































We’ll see if Paul rejects this kind of hatred or not.  Your turn Paul, what do you have to say about Manson and similar nuts?

And, Secret Service, you need to have a chat with this guy Manson.

Saturday, December 17, 2011

This chart may tell it all


The Washington Post Poll Watcher has a chart they may tell you just about all you need to know about the Repub battle for the Pres nomination and Newt Gingrich’s prospects as the lead dog.  Looks like Newt is on a sled going rapidly downhill losing 8 points in 9 days.  Merry Christmas Newt.
















Friday, December 16, 2011

NEW POLL: Americans largely agree on one thing

Most of us--65% to 80% at least--agree upon one thing.  We dread having to get through the whole 2012 election.  We just can't wait to get it over and done.  Republicans, Democrats, Independents, Men, Women, young, old, it just doesn't matter, we are NOT looking forward to politics next year.  Okay, those of us who blog about politics are looking forward to watching the primary and general election battles, but most people aren't.  Here are the numbers from a recent Gallup survey.


















Read the poll results here: http://www.gallup.com/poll/151592/Dreading-Anticipating-2012-Campaign.aspx










Tom Price—Dishonest/unethical/misleading.


Sixty-four percent of Americans rate the honesty and ethics of members of Congress low or very low.  Congress gets basically the same rating as lobbyists but considerably worse that car salespeople and telemarketers.  See: http://www.gallup.com/poll/151460/Record-Rate-Honesty-Ethics-Members-Congress-Low.aspx

Both parties score poor on honesty and ethics but when asked which party was more honest and ethical in a recent Pew Research poll, only 28% of American voters picked the Republican Party while 45% picked  the Democrats.  See: http://www.people-press.org/2011/12/15/frustration-with-congress-could-hurt-republican-incumbents/

If you wonder why Americans don’t trust Republicans, you need to go no further than to examine the contents of the letter below that Republican Congressman Tom Price of Georgia recently sent to his constituents.  It is filled with misleading statements and outright lies.

Can you spot Price’s dishonesty?  Hint, read the highlighted paragraphs carefully.


































Price’s letter contains numerous misleading and/untrue statements.  I refer specifically to paragraphs three and five, which are highlighted.

Paragraph Three is grossly misleading.  Price is talking about the Paul Ryan budget proposal.  He makes it sound so good.  Coverage is “guaranteed,” he says, and it is “personalized” and people with low incomes and in poor health will come out much better.  So, what’s the problem?  Price neglects to inform his constituents that Ryan’s proposal would not only destroy Medicare by turning it into a premium subsidy, defined contribution plan but it would also substantially increase the out-of-pocket costs of Medicare participants.   In a letter to Paul Ryan about his plan, the Congressional Budget Office said:

“Under the proposal, most beneficiaries who receive premium support payments would pay more for their health care than if they participated in traditional Medicare under either of CBO’s long-term scenarios. CBO estimated that, in 2030, a typical 65-year-old would pay 68 percent of the benchmark under the proposal, compared with 25 percent under the extended-baseline scenario and 30 percent under the alternative fiscal scenario.”

Contrary to what Price says in the first sentence of paragraph six, the Democrats are not the ones trying to “end Medicare as we know it.”  It is Price, Ryan and the Republican Party who are trying to kill Medicare.


Price makes additional false and/or misleading statements in paragraph five of his letter when he discusses Medicare “cuts” and the role and composition of the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) as defined in the health care law. 

Price writes: “…last year the President and his congressional allies jammed through a health care law which cuts more than $500 billion from Medicare.  Moreover, they put in place an unaccountable, unelected board of fifteen bureaucrats, known as the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), and gave it the power to deny care to seniors.  The IPAB will be charged with making coverage decisions on health care.  These decisions cannot be appealed, and the board is not subject to oversight.   This is current law!”

That is NOT current law and never has been.  Here are three ways Price is misleading or just not telling the truth in this paragraph.

  1. The law DOES NOT cut $500 billion from Medicare.  The $500 billion to which he refers has to do with cuts in the future growth of Medicare.  They are NOT immediate cuts as Price implies but are spread over 10 years.  They amount to a 7% reduction in future growth over that period.   Medicare’s chief actuary, Richard Foster says these cuts will extend the projected life of Medicare Part A by 12 years.  And, they will not reduce coverage to Medicare participants. 
  2. The Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) IS NOT unaccountable.  Its members are appointed by the President after consultation with Congress and must be confirmed by the Senate.  Additionally, the Congress can reject the IPAB’s recommendations or substitute alternative recommendations.  The IPAB IS ACCOUNTABLE both to the President and the Congress of the United States.
  3. The IPAB DOES NOT have the power to deny coverage to seniors.  The Act specifically prohibits the IPAB from, among other things, including any recommendation “to ration health care, raise revenues or Medicare beneficiary premiums under section 1818, 1818A, or 1839, increase Medicare beneficiary cost-sharing (including deductibles, coinsurance, and copayments), or otherwise restrict benefits or modify eligibility criteria.” See Section 3403 of the Act. 


See the following for the truth about the $500 billion and the membership and power of the IPAB.




 Section 3403 deals with the IPAB.

Bottom line:  Price’s letter is dishonest and unethical.  He deserves a vey low rating on honesty and ethics.  He doesn’t deserve to be re-elected.  Neither, do his fellow Republicans.  

Thursday, December 15, 2011

New Polls bring BAD news for Republicans


A couple of new polls suggest that all incumbents, particularly Republican incumbents in Congress, could be in real trouble next year.  Gallup and Pew are both finding that anti-incumbent sentiment among voters is at record  levels.  2012 could shape up to be the kind of “throw-the-bums-out” election we saw in 2010 but with Republicans being hit this time with most of the voter anger.

Gallup says three-quarters of registered voters (76%) say most members of Congress SHOULD NOT be re-elected.  Nearly 40% say that includes their own representatives.

Pew Research obtained similar results:  67% in the Pew Research poll said most members of Congress SHOULD NOT be re-elected.   That's the highest anti-incumbent sentiment Pew has found in surveys going back to 1990.  33% said their own representative DID NOT deserve to be re-elected.  This anti-incumbent sentiment is higher among Independents.  73% of Independents say Most members of Congress SHOULD NOT be re-elected.  43% of Independents say their own member of Congress SHOULD NOT be re-elected.

Voters appear to be directing most of their anger toward Republicans. 

For example, in the Gallup poll:

  • 50% say we have a “Do-Nothing” Congress and 40% blame Republican leaders in Congress for that.  Only 23% blame Democratic leaders.
  • Compared to Democrats, Republicans in Congress are seen as taking MORE extreme positions, being  LESS willing to work with the other side, being LESS capable of running government and being LESS honest and ethical.


Pew had almost identical findings.  Additionally, Pew found that:
  •  Most Americans think the political system can work fine but blame members of Congress for the problem.
  • 50% say the current Congress has accomplished LESS than any recent Congress they have known.


Click on the following links to read more about the Gallup and Pew poll results:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/151433/Record-High-Anti-Incumbent-Sentiment-Toward-Congress.aspx
  


Gingrich continues slide in polls

Gallup's most recent national daily tracking poll shows that Gingrich continues to lose ground against Romney.  As little as a week ago, Gingrich had a commanding 14 point lead over Romney (37% to 23%).  Newt's lead is now down to just 5 points (29% to 24%).

Read the full results and see a graph showing Newt's declining support here: http://www.gallup.com/poll/election.aspx

Wednesday, December 14, 2011

NEW POLLS: Gingrich declining in Iowa, weak against Obama


Several new polls suggest that Republican support for Newt Gingrich in Iowa is declining.  Public Policy Polling says Ron Paul has cut Newt’s lead to just one point 22% to 21% with Romney at 16% and Bachmann at 11%.  Gingrich’s favorability rating has declined 19 points in just one week according to the poll while Paul’s favorability rating has grown.  Could it be the more Republicans actually learn about Newt, the less they like him?  American  Research Group has found a similar slippage of Gingrich support in New Hampshire. 

Newt also seems to do much worse against Obama than Romney.  An NBC Wall Street Journal poll just out indicates that Obama would beat Gingrich 51% to 40% but barely beat Romney (47% Obama to 45% Romney).

MSNBC attributed Newt’s favorability ratings as contributing to both his lead among Republicans and his problem in a head-to-head general election contest with Obama.

Gingrich enjoys strong numbers among Republicans (46 percent positive vs. 21 percent negative), conservatives (42 percent positive vs. 23 percent negative) and Tea Party supporters (54 percent positive vs. 16 percent negative). In fact, they are higher than Romney’s numbers among these same three key Republican groups.”

But that’s as far as the Gingrich appeal goes, according to the data. “Gingrich struggles with other important voting blocs — like women (20 percent positive vs. 38 percent negative), independents (16 percent positive vs. 40 percent negative) and suburban residents (25 percent positive vs. 41 percent negative),” MSNBC continued. “By comparison, Romney fares better among women (22 percent positive vs. 31 percent negative), independents (21 percent positive vs. 29 percent negative) and suburban dwellers (29 percent positive vs. 30 percent negative).”

In all these cases Romney has a much larger set of “neutral” respondents than Gingrich, meaning his job would be to sway their feelings from apathetic to positive rather than from negative to positive.

Most analysts have expected Newt's candidacy to go into a nosedive due to some major gaff.  Could it be that his decline will happen--indeed is beginning to happen--not for any specific thing he has said or done but the for the very simple reason that Newt is Newt and people just had to be reminded once again why he was one of the least admired politicians in the country back in the late 1990s?

Read more here:




Forecast: Newt 49% chance of winning Iowa


FiveThirtyEight says there is a 49.6% probability that Newt Gingrich will win the Iowa caucuses likely obtaining 25.1% of the vote.  Paul is projected  to come in second with 20.7% with Romney third at 15.6%.  FiveThirtyEight cautions that “the confidence intervals are extremely wide. In Mr. Gingrich’s case, for instance, the 90 percent confidence interval runs from 9 percent of the vote to about 40 percent of the vote. This is simply a reflection of how inaccurate primary polls have been in the past, as well as the wide range of developments that are possible over the final three weeks of the campaign.”  See the Low Range and High Range in the table below.




Read more about the forecast here:

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Gingrich offered $1 million to drop out of GOP race


Conservative talk show host Michael Savage today offered Newt Gingrich a million dollars to drop out of the race for the GOP nomination. Savage says Newt can’t defeat Obama because:

  • WHEN HE WAS SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE, GINGRICH FAILED TO DELIVER ON HIS SO-CALLED CONTRACT WITH AMERICA.
  • HE MADE ADS WITH NANCY PELOSI PROMOTING THE FALSE THEORY OF GLOBAL WARMING.
  • HE’S IN FAVOR OF AMNESTY FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS.
  • HE’S TAKEN HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FROM FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC, TWO OF THE MOST CORRUPT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS IN HISTORY.
  • HE’S CHEATED ON TWO WIVES AND LEFT BOTH OF THEM WHILE THEY WERE BOTH SERIOUSLY ILL, WHICH WILL DESTROY HIS CHANCES AMONG FEMALE VOTERS.
  • HE CALLED THE REPUBLICAN PLAN TO REFORM MEDICARE “RIGHT WING SOCIAL ENGINEERING.”
  • IN A PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE AGAINST OBAMA, REGARDLESS OF HOW WELL HE DOES, ON TELEVISION, HE WILL COME OFF BADLY COMPARED TO OBAMA AND LOOK LIKE NOTHING MORE THAN WHAT HE IS: A FAT, OLD, WHITE MAN.


Savage goes on to say:

IF NEWT GINGRICH REALLY LOVES THIS COUNTRY AS MUCH AS HE SAYS HE DOES, IF HE REALLY WANTS WHAT IS BEST FOR AMERICA, HE WILL SET HIS EGO ASIDE, CALL ME, AND ACCEPT MY OFFER. HIS CONTINUED CANDIDACY SPELLS NOTHING BUT RUIN FOR CONSERVATIVES, REPUBLICANS, AND ALL TRUE AMERICAN PATRIOTS. ONE MILLION DOLLARS IN EXCHANGE FOR PRESERVING THE NATION, NEWT. I SAY TAKE THE MONEY… AND DON’T RUN.


You know something, I think Savage has it right.  What’s one million dollars if it could help us avoid ever having to say the words “President Gingrich?”  I say let’s raise the stakes.  Let’s offer Newt $10 million or $20 million or let him set the price.  Okay, Newt is NOT going to win the GOP nomination and, if he does, he is NOT going to defeat Obama, but, think about how much of a relief it would be NOT to have to worry about a "Newt as President" nightmare actually happening.  Maybe we should start collect money—a “Send Newt Packing” fund.  

Trump backs out of Trump Debate


Donald Trump canceled the debate he was to “moderate” in Iowa on December 27th citing concerns by GOP candidates that he might run as an independent.  Trump said he could not conclusively agree not to run since the Republican who wins the GOP nomination might not be the right person to defeat Obama and Obama’s defeat may all be left up to the Good Donald.

Trump said:

“The Republican Party candidates are very concerned that sometime after the final episode of The Apprentice, on May 20th, when the equal time provisions are no longer applicable to me, I will announce my candidacy for President of the United States as an Independent and that, unless I conclusively agree not to run as an Independent, they will not agree to attend or be a part of the Newsmax debate scheduled for December 27, 2011…
Therefore, so that there is no conflict of interest within the Republican Party, I have decided not to be the moderator of the Newsmax debate… I must leave all of my options open….

Monday, December 12, 2011

Has Newt peaked in Iowa?


Another new poll shows Newt leading Romney in Iowa but may indicate that his lead over Romney is narrowing. 

A University of Iowa Hawkeye Poll shows Gingrich leading Romney by 29.8 percent to 20.3 percent, but with only 35 percent of likely caucus-goers indicating that they are "very satisfied" with their candidate choices.  The poll was conducted between November 30 and December 7, 2011.

While the Hawkeye poll shows Gingrich with a substantial lead, the results indicate that he might have already peaked.  During the first few days of polling Newt was leading Romney by as much as 13 points largely due to Cain supporters switching their support from Cain to Gingrich.  However, by the end of the poll Newt’s lead over Romney was down to as little as 5 percent.  In other words, support for Newt may already be on the decline as we have seen with other front runners.  The key for Romney is how much support Newt will lose by January 3 when the caucuses are held. 

Read the poll results here:


http://news-releases.uiowa.edu/2011/december/121211Caucus_Hawkeye_Poll_topline.pdf

Friday, December 9, 2011

Consumer confidence up/trade deficit down


Two pieces of good economic news were released today.  The Thomson Reuters/University of Michigan preliminary index of consumer sentiment rose to 67.7 this month up from 64.1 last month. That’s much better than most economists expected and the highest level since June.  It could be a signal that consumers are ready to spend again.

In another good sign for the future of the economy, the trade deficit dropped to its lowest level since April according to the Commerce Department.  The drop was driven by a sharp decline in the demand for petroleum.

Any improvement in the economy is good news for Obama and the Democrats and bad news for Republicans who were hoping to ride to success in the 2012 election based upon high unemployment and a sluggish economy. 


Read about the Consumer Confidence report here:


Read about the trade deficit here:

OMB report: 10-year benefits of fed regs outweigh costs by $593 billion


The NET BENEFIT of federal regulations over the last 10 years may be as much as $593 billion dollars according to a recent report from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

In 1999, Republicans pushed through The Regulatory Right-to-Know Act, sponsored by Commerce Committee chairman Tom Bliley (R-Va.) and Rep. David McIntosh (R-Ind.).  The act requires the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to prepare annual statements detailing the estimated costs and benefits of federal regulatory programs.  Republicans planned to use the data from these OMB reports to demand an end to “job killing” federal regulations by vividly demonstrating their huge cost to the country. 

Well, you probably will not hear too much from Republicans about OMB’s most recent findings.

OMB’s most recent report is out covering the period from October 1, 2000, to September 30, 2010.  OMB found that federal regulations cost between $44 and $62 billion and generated between $132 billion and $655 billion in benefits.  In other words, the benefits of federal regulations outweighed the costs of compliance by $88 billion to $593.3 billion over that 10-year period.  The table below gives a breakdown of the costs and benefits by agency as shown in the OMB report.

Thank you Republicans for giving us a tool to show just how valuable federal regulations are to the country.  Even at their highest estimated cost, federal regulations provide a return of $2 for every $1 they cost and perhaps as much as nearly $10 for every $1.  Not bad, not bad at all.

Table 1-1: Estimates of the Total Annual Benefits and Costs of Major Federal Rules by Agency, October 1, 2000 - September 30, 2010 (billions of 2001 dollars)
Agency
Number of Rules
Benefits
Costs
Department of Agriculture
6
0.9 to 1.3
1.0 to 1.34
Department of Energy
10
8.0 to 10.9
4.5 to 5.1
Department of Health and Human Services
18
18.0 to 40.5
3.7 to 5.2
Department of Homeland Security
1
< 0.1
< 0.1
Department of Housing and Urban Development
1
2.3
0.9
Department of Justice
4
1.8 to 4.0
0.8 to 1.0
Department of Labor
6
0.4 to 1.5
0.4 to 0.5
Department of Transportation (DOT)
26
14.6 to 25.5
7.5 to 14.3
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)16
32
81.8 to 550.7
23.3 to 28.5
Joint DOT and EPA
1
3.9 to 18.2
1.7 to 4.7
Total
105
131.7 to 655.0
43.7 to 61.7
Source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/inforeg/2011_cb/2011_cba_report.pdf