Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Republicans tout new poll showing Pa. special election competitive

1. A poll conducted for the conservative American Action Network shows businessman Tim Burns (R) and former congressional aide Mark Critz (D) in a dead heat with less than a month remaining in their special election race in Pennsylvania's 12th district.

Critz take 40 percent to 39 percent for Burns, according to the survey conducted by Republican pollster John McLaughlin and obtained by the Fix.

The closeness of the race, which is set for May 18, is attributable in large part to a difficult national environment for Democrats. Just 31 percent of those polled said President Barack Obama was doing either an excellent or good job while 68 percent rated him as doing a fair or poor job. Roughly one in four voters (26 percent) said things in the country are on the right track while 61 percent said the county was going in the wrong direction. Asked about the health care bill that passed Congress last month, 32 percent said they supported the bill while 57 percent opposed it.

"This poll confirmed that the citizens in this district -- Republicans, Independents or Democrats -- are sick of the runaway spending, the deficits and the Washington takeover of our economy," said Rob Collins, president of the American Action Network, an outside conservative organization formed earlier this year by a handful of Republican party poobahs.

A few grains of salt are necessary. First, this is a poll sponsored by a group with clear conservative leanings. Second, while the district did vote for Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) in 2008, there are twice as many registered Democrats as registered Republicans in the 12th. Third, the special election will be held on the same day as the 2010 primaries where Democrats have competitive Senate and governor's races while Republicans have neither.

With that said, it's clear that both national parties view the district, which was held by the late John Murtha (D) for more than three decades, as genuinely competitive. The National Republican Congressional Committee has spent more than $247,000 on ads in the district while the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has dropped $136,000 in independent expenditures.

Burns will be in Washington tonight to be feted by House Republican leaders including Minority Leader John Boehner (Ohio) and NRCC Chairman Pete Sessions (Texas). Critz will be the beneficiary of a D.C. fundraiser of his own tonight with Sen. Bob Casey Jr. (Pa.), Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen (Md.) among others.

Democrats have won the last five competitive special House elections. Given the favorable political climate, national Republicans almost certainly must win either the Pennsylvania race or the Hawaii special election, which will happen four days later, in order to preserve a sense of momentum heading into the fall campaign.

2. In the wake of former Gov. Tommy Thompson's (R) announcement that he would not challenge Sen. Russ Feingold (D) this fall, most Republicans acknowledged privately that the race was likely lost.

But, according to an informed party source, there is an increasing likelihood that Ron Johnson, a wealthy CEO of a company based in Oshkosh, is leaning toward making a bid.

Johnson spoke at the same Madison, Wisc. Tea Party rally last week at which Thompson announced he wasn't running; "A true conservative seeks office as an act of service and only when duty calls," Johnson said that day. "I am hear to say 'duty is calling'".

Said one informed Wisconsin Republican of a Johnson candidacy: "If Ron Johnson gets in this race, and I think he will, we will have a candidate that will speak to Republicans, Tea Partiers and Independents like never before."

Johnson would not have the primary race to himself, however. Wealthy developer Terrence Wall has been running for months and Dick Leinenkugel, a former Commerce Secretary in Gov. Jim Doyle's (D) Administration, is also running.

And, Feingold is no easy mark. Not only has he compiled one of the most moderate voting records in the Senate, he is also sitting on $4.26 million in campaign cash.

Six years ago, Republicans nominated wealthy businessman Tim Michels but watched as Feingold cruised to an eleven-point victory in a difficult election cycle nationally for Democrats.

3. Six weeks before California voters head to the polls to choose Sen. Barbara Boxer's (D) Republican opponent, the American Future Fund, an Iowa-based conservative group, is spending $1 million on ads attacking former Rep. Tom Campbell's (R) record on taxes.

"Campbell has a more than twenty-year record of higher taxes and spending," says the ad's narrator, who goes on to allege that while serving as the state's director of finance Campbell "drove us deeper into debt with the largest spending increase in California history."

In a statement on the ad, AFF President Sandy Greiner said that Campbell's refusal to sign a "no new taxes" pledge was "disturbing".

Polling suggests the June 8 primary is a two-person race between Campbell, who has run unsuccessfully for the Senate in 1992 and 1998, and former Hewlett Packard executive Carly Fiorina who is financing her campaign, at least in part, using her own checkbook. Conservative state Assemblyman Chuck DeVore has struggled to get much traction to date in the contest.

Republicans believe they may have an outside shot at beating Boxer this fall although California remains a strongly Democratic state.

ALSO READ: How major donors are trying to influence the 2011 redistricting process in California.

4. When Sen. >Scott Brown (R-Mass.) used his beat-up pickup truck to symbolize his average guy image in the Massachusetts Senate special election earlier this year, you knew it would spawn imitators.

The latest copycat is Rep. Jerry Moran (R), who in the first ad of his Senate bid in Kansas, is shown driving around the state -- in some sort of sedan! -- with nary a mention of the 14 years he has spent in Congress.

"If there's a road in Kansas, chances are Jerry Moran's been on it," says the ad's narrator. Later, the narrator says: "There are a lot of roads in Kansas, and Jerry has learned something from every one."

Moran and Rep. Todd Tiahrt are running for the Republican nod on Aug. 3 for the seat being vacated by Sen. Sam Brownback (R) -- the heavy favorite to be the Sunflower State's next governor. Democrats have a very weak Senate field so whoever wins the GOP nod will be a strong frontrunner heading into the fall.

Moran actually isn't the first aspiring 2010 candidate to borrow a page from the Scott Brown playbook. That would be Idaho House candidate Vaughn Ward (R) who ran ads featuring him driving around the state in a pickup of his own.

And, Brown, in truth, probably got the truck idea from former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson (R) who built his 1994 campaign around his own little red truck. Imitation in campaigns, as in life, is the sincerest form of flattery.

5. A new Gallup poll shows that 46 percent of registered voters believe President Obama deserves a second term while 50 percent said he does not, numbers strikingly similar to where President Bill Clinton stood at this time in 1994.

Not surprisingly, partisan of each political stripe are already strongly aligned in regards Obama's re-election. Eighty four percent of Democrats said he deserves a second term while 88 percent of Republicans said he did not. A majority of independents, considered critical to both parties' winning calculus this fall and in 2012, said Obama did not deserve re-election.

Those numbers mirror Clinton's standing in March 1994 when 46 percent of adults said that Clinton deserved to win re-election in 1996 while 48 percent said he did not. Clinton's re-election numbers took a dive as the year went on, bottoming out at 38 percent saying he deserved re-election in October. His party took an electoral beating one month later but Clinton went on to win a second term rather easily.

House Democrats are hoping that Obama's political trajectory doesn't mimic that of Clinton. Of course, there is an argument to be made -- and we have made it -- that Obama would be better positioned to win in 2012 if Democrats lose control of one of the two congressional chambers this fall.

ALSO CLICK: PPP shows former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney still leading in the 2012 Republican presidential horserace.

By Chris Cillizza  |  April 20, 2010; 6:00 AM ET
Categories:  Morning Fix  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: What can (and should) Charlie Crist do?
Next: Jim DeMint bucks party (again), endorses Marlin Stutzman in Indiana

Comments

This polling data does not seem to be consistent at all with Gallup, who today says Obama's job approval in Penn. is 57.4%, and his disapproval is 33.4%. I suspect, like the article points out, that it is a biased push poll that is highly inaccurate.

Posted by: smedleyludlow | April 22, 2010 1:05 PM | Report abuse

And if even that self serving poll had found that the R's don't stand a chance, it would simply have been allowed to die without ever getting to the candidate, let alone anyone else.

Improbable things happen, and when they happen and get noticed, it doesn't make them any less improbable. we of course never notice when improbable things don't happen.

The key to CC's whole shtick is plausibility, in that as long as he can find Republican Good News that isn't absolutely incredible (that is not credible) even to Republicans he can keep the hope and the shtick alive.

Of course, when the number of new jobs increases by 100,000 every month, (160,000 last month, 260,000 this month, 360,000 next month) and the rest of the good news continues, and when Obama begins to get well past the half way point in getting his platform enacted, and can be seen to be making progress on the remnant, This shtick will get stale, then trite, than totally boring.

It expect the Dems to gain at least three seats net in the Senate, and at least ten seats net in the House. I even give a 30% chance that the R's don't win a single Senate race, largely due to T-Party destruction of any Centrist Candidates for the R's.

Posted by: ceflynline | April 21, 2010 5:03 PM | Report abuse

so there's 23 posts from others compared to 18 by the corner. so this is what you want your comment section to be comprised of, Chris? you've warned him, but apparently he doesn't think your warnings are real, or have teeth. considering you are recognized as a blogger/reporter nationally and seen on many tv shows as a political whiz, is this how you want your comment section to be seen? Some posters from both sides wanting to debate the pros and cons having to wade through the flood of double spaced repetitive insulting spewage? Really Chris?

Posted by: katem1 | April 21, 2010 9:02 AM | Report abuse

C'mon, Chris -- how can you mention "Great Moments in Pickup Truck Campaigning" and not mention the 1996 Democratic Senate primary upset spun by Victor Morales in Texas, when he blew the doors off, so to speak, of Reps. John Bryant and Jim Chapman? And again whupped Bryant in the runoff?

Sure, he got pounded like cheap steak by Phil Gramm in the general...but hey...he had a pickup truck!

Posted by: BobT13 | April 20, 2010 7:07 PM | Report abuse

These attitudes sure did NOT get cleared by the sensitivity training department.


YEA the COLBERT KING ARTICLES, THE EUGENE ROBINSON ARTICLE -


The OBAMA ATTACK MACHINE


FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM

This is all Hate Speech.


You guys have done a fantastic job of constructing a POSTRACIAL WORLD.


Im sure you will run health care just fine.... if you get the chance.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 20, 2010 5:11 PM | Report abuse

My parents were born in the PA 9th and the PA 12th. I visit there regularly. Here in Eastern PA we would love to have the kinds of roads they have in Shusterville, and we'd love to have the kinds of services they have in Murthatown.

These are the perks of sticking with the congressman/party who benefits your district. If the people like Shuster, they will reelect him. If the people liked Murtha, I can see them voting for his congressional aide. The 12th has benefited from Murtha, and I think they wil stay with leadership that benefits them. That's what happened in NY's 23rd. the GOP ran against the many Federally funded programs that keep the 23rd together. It was against their interests to vote for the Republican (that and he didn't live in or understand their CD). I think the PA 12th is in very much the same situation, and they will vote for the Democrat.

The PA 12th is very likely to vanish in the next redistricting anyway. It's charming shape was the Pennsylavnia GOP's tip of the hat to Murtha. They created a "safe seat" for him.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | April 20, 2010 3:15 PM | Report abuse


Do you write this garbage Chris? or do you just copy and paste from Rahmbo's email broadcast?

Posted by: Obama_TRAITOR_in_Chief | April 20, 2010 2:44 PM | Report abuse

Margaret

The Republicans offer the Poeple of Pennsylvania's 12th a great deal.


So what is your position on the infrastructure?


You appear to be saying that Murtha's earmarks are good, Schuster's bad.

Pennsylvania for decades was the most industrialized state in the country - all those towns have histories of industry and you can see the results in the buildings and downtowns which clearly used to thrive.


So what do you want them to do? Just sit there and do nothing? Or do you want them to try to jumpstart industry - and give the businesses there a fair chance - and try to attract new businesses ????

The whole thing is about attracting and growing jobs.

I suppose you would rather spend money on a government agency - and have nothing to show for it at the end of the year.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 20, 2010 12:39 PM | Report abuse

The GOP offers PA's 12th CD nothing.

And 37th, if you are so concerned about the PA 12th being stuffed with Federal goodies, you need to get a load of what Bud and Bill Shuster (Republicans brimming with fiscal responsibility) have done for PA's 9th -- they make Murtha look like he wasn't trying. They have the nicest highways you have ever seen there -- and clear sailing because there is hardly any traffic on them at all.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | April 20, 2010 12:15 PM | Report abuse

OBAMA INACTION ON DOMESTIC TORTURE AND EXTRAJUDICIAL INJUSTICE LEAVES DEMS POLITICALLY VULNERABLE

Will the White House address extrajudicial injustice in America -- programs spawned or expanded under Bush-Cheney -- before the GOP makes an issue of these abuses and blames Obama?

***

Victims of nationwide federal-local silent microwave/RF assault demand:

"MR. OBAMA, TEAR DOWN THOSE HOMELAND CELLULAR TORTURE TOWERS!"

"Project Geneva" -- You cannot wait. You must act now. The operatives running this covert system will not stand down unless they are forcefully and publicly TAKEN DOWN.

http://nowpublic.com/world/u-s-silently-tortures-americans-cell-tower-microwaves
http://nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-america

OR NowPublic.com/scrivener RE: "U.S. Silently..." and "Gestapo USA..."

Posted by: scrivener50 | April 20, 2010 11:35 AM | Report abuse

The Obama attack machine continues to attack whites -


This is pre-judice at it worst - whites are being INTIMIDATED FROM EXERCISING THEIR FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

This is a Civil Rights Violation -


If blacks were intimidated from voting like this, there would be all sorts of an outcry.


Colbert King - he jumped into as a part of this attack machine - and instead of taking and listening to the comments -


Colbert King wrote a second piece - tried to mock people who disagreed with him - called millions of people RACIST AGAIN - and then proceeded to insist that the Tea Party was the second coming of George Wallace.


This proves the RACIAL PREJUDICE OF COLBERT KING - no one else.


Eugene Robinson jumped in TODAY - and insisted that there WERE racists in the Tea Party Movement -


I guess Mr. Robinson knows these people personally and can certify that they hold those views.


Otherwise, Mr. Robinson is RACIALLY PREJUDICE AS WELL -


Mr. Robinson is PRE - JUDGING these people based on the COLOR OF THEIR SKIN and their exercise of Freedom of Speech.


The point is these ATTACKS HAVE CONTINUED TODAY IN THE WASHINGTON POST OP-ED.


Obama's people continue the FALSE STORYLINE in the comments section.


This is not based on seeking any racial harmony - but it is all politically motivated.


Obama has done nothing about it - Obama condones it - and if after condoning these attacks FOR A MONTH NOW, Obama comes out against them, it would be hypocrisy at its greatest.


Obama has DESTROYED HIS TERM IN OFFICE WITH THESE FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM.


FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM IS OBAMA'S LEGACY.


THE COUNTRY HAS BEEN SET BACK DECADES.


No one will trust black candidates again.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 20, 2010 11:26 AM | Report abuse

I find it totally interesting that MOST polls posted are also listed as either 'republican' or 'conservative'. Doesn't the author read any OTHER polls? Republicans STOLE two presidential elections. avoided the truth instead opting to invade a country based in a total pack of lies, neglected another country because of said invasion, and have left us in an embroiled battle in Afghanastan that could have ceased years ago if not for that neglect. We are suppposed to TRUST them on polls? I don't think so.

Posted by: dlsoops | April 20, 2010 11:19 AM | Report abuse

The Republicans' chances are increasing by the day -


So far the democrats have done the wrong thing time after time.

From this point of view, the democratic bumbling will continue.


Calling people who do not agree with you racist does NOT help the situation either - it only makes it more difficult for democratic candidates.

Ask anyone - compared to January - are you more certain or less certain that they would vote for a democrat ??? Everyone I have spoken to are even more angry now - and that makes the democrats' task at getting voters even harder.


These FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM are Obama's legacy - no one will ever forget - that instead of being Post-Racial - Obama decided to allow a racially-charged atmosphere to go on.

THESE CHARGES ARE ONLY BEING DIRECTED AT WHITES -


Instead of acting to heal racial divisions, Obama's attack machine is setting back race relations decades.

WHO WOULD VOTE FOR A BLACK CANDIDATE AGAIN - AFTER HEARING OBAMA'S ATTACK MACHINE SCREAM RACIST AT PEOPLE WHO DO NOT AGREE WITH OBAMA ???

Talk about destroying all the progress that has been made.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 20, 2010 11:05 AM | Report abuse

All DemocRats seats are in PLAY!

The Big Purge is coming!

Posted by: theaz | April 20, 2010 10:56 AM | Report abuse

1. Tim Burns has a great shot to win this congressional district. Democrats or not, these folks are not Obama Democrats, they are Murtha Democrats. Big difference there. They are really independents under the Democratic label. Burns will likely win this district b/c of his focus on jobs and the economy and a distrust of Washington, which is controlled by Democrats.

2. Russ Feingold will be given a race for the ages b/c Republicans sense they have a shot, albeit a far one, of winning back control of the Senate. The races already in sight: Delaware, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Illinois, North Dakota, Arkansas, Colorodo, Nevada, California and Connecticut. Republicans must get a great recruit and put Wisconsin and Washington in play. This gives them a slight room for error and they could still gain control even losing 2 of those 12 races and keeping control of all the seats current. The only 3 Democrats even have a shot to win: Ohio, Florida and Missouri. Republicans are strong favorites in every race so putting Wisconsin in play and getting Rossi into the Washington race is extremely important.

Posted by: reason5 | April 20, 2010 10:48 AM | Report abuse

1. Tim Burns has a great shot to win this congressional district. Democrats or not, these folks are not Obama Democrats, they are Murtha Democrats. Big difference there. They are really independents under the Democratic label. Burns will likely win this district b/c of his focus on jobs and the economy and a distrust of Washington, which is controlled by Democrats.

2. Russ Feingold will be given a race for the ages b/c Republicans sense they have a shot, albeit a far one, of winning back control of the Senate. The races already in sight: Delaware, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Illinois, North Dakota, Arkansas, Colorodo, Nevada, California and Connecticut. Republicans must get a great recruit and put Wisconsin and Washington in play. This gives them a slight room for error and they could still gain control even losing 2 of those 12 races and keeping control of all the seats current. The only 3 Democrats even have a shot to win: Ohio, Florida and Missouri. Republicans are strong favorites in every race so putting Wisconsin in play and getting Rossi into the Washington race is extremely important.

Posted by: reason5 | April 20, 2010 10:47 AM | Report abuse

We the people are feed up and do not trust Obama and his Progressive, Socialist, Marxist, Radical, Liberal Democrats.

And to Bondosan>

It's about Ideology nor race.

Freedom versus Tyranny!

Obama is from Rev Wrights Black Liberation Theology!

That's a Marxist Ideology!

We are not Racists to be strongly against Obama and his Progressive, Socialist, Marxist, Radical, Liberal ideology!

Wake up to the truth and not to the false Liberal Spin and lies!

Posted by: Acornisascam | April 20, 2010 10:10 AM | Report abuse

Andy, with both of their venerable U.S. Senators on one side, BHO's endorsement would have to not cross them, I think. Additionally, the unions are on the same side as the senators. And unions are one real source of turnout in a special election. I think the Anglo D is helped by DSC money and is more centrist, but he would be relying on indies and centrists in the Special, who poll better than they turn out. I do not think there is any % in that race for BHO, unless he can talk the Anglo out of the race, which should tick off the DSC, thus making it a completely zero game for BHO, or so I think.
=============
OttoDog asked several questions at 7:38A to which the answers are either "we do not know yet" or "OK" or , "actually he did not say that". My broker, a CFG R, says that the TARP and the stimulus saved the nation [in his world, that does mean the nation's publicly traded businesses, not its employees]. He grudgingly concedes that TARP and ARRA were necessary, that TARP is repaying, better than expected, and that FinReg will be good if it "does not go too far". He would vote for the Dodd bill. I was surprised by that, but he explained that he did not deal in selling leveraged unsecured "paper" and those dealings almost closed his company, Wachovia, which had to be taken over by Wells Fargo. He does not want to go broke just as his two girls are reaching college age. It is all perspective, isn't it?

Posted by: mark_in_austin | April 20, 2010 9:54 AM | Report abuse

Bondosan


If Obama brought his children to learn the teachings of Rev. Wright for years, does that make Obama a racist ???

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 20, 2010 9:50 AM | Report abuse

Bondosan


Is Rev. Wright a racist ???


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 20, 2010 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Re: PA-12, its a remarkably close race, given the claims of the fantastic national environment for Repubs. I fail to see, and I think the average voter fails to see, what they're offering as an alternative. Right now, its just 'no, no, no'. Though I did hear on the news this AM that McConnell is walking back some of his criticisms of the Financial Reform bill. He knows he stepped in it with that Wall Street meetingwith Cornyn; but he's still leaving tracks, having not yet cleaned everything off his shoe. Problem is, he's still in the cowpatch & there are flops in every direction between where he is and where he needs to be.

Posted by: bsimon1 | April 20, 2010 9:43 AM | Report abuse

Bondosan

Obviously not.


I will say this - the very definition of prejudice is PRE - JUDGING.


Isn't that what is being done to the Tea Party people - JUDGING THEM BASED ON THE COLOR OF THEIR SKIN - AND THEIR EXERCISE OF FREE SPEECH ???


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 20, 2010 9:38 AM | Report abuse

37:

Are you a racist?

Posted by: Bondosan | April 20, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

DDAWD

You never complained about "drowning out conversation" when it was your group of Obama people who flooded the boards day and night with promises of bipartisanship and a post-racial world.

Ever complain then ???


Your complaints carry no weight based on your past actions. Plain and simple.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 20, 2010 9:26 AM | Report abuse

DDAWD at 8:52 and 9:00


Why don't you try to debate the issues without personal attacks, name calling and false charges of racism ?


Just a radical idea.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 20, 2010 9:09 AM | Report abuse

I can't stand those Pick up truck "I'm one of you" BS commercials. All these guys are millionares and spend their weekends hanging with their other popped-collar buddies at the local country club.

The special election in PA will be all about turnout, and the Democratic machine in the PA-12th is significantly more advanced than their GOP counterparts. The Hawaii race needs Obama to put this disagreement between the two candidates to rest now. He should pick the person he likes and let that be leaked out.

Posted by: AndyR3 | April 20, 2010 9:06 AM | Report abuse

heh, I don't think there's even a point to writing on here anymore, is there? 37th is intent on drowning out any conversation and Cillizza is just a stupid little b*tch about the whole thing.

Posted by: DDAWD | April 20, 2010 9:00 AM | Report abuse

DDAWD

That is twice that you used that word


Chalk that up with the sexual slurs.

Why don't you go on the sidewalk and start calling people racist to their faces ???

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 20, 2010 8:59 AM | Report abuse

Margaret


Thank you for your endorsement - so I will be easy on you

You write:

"The citizens there are not concerned about taxes"


________________________________________

Here is a rare slip of tongue of a democrat - revealing the real truth of what they are all about.


The democrats WANT THE CITIZENS TO NOT CARE ABOUT TAXES.


Dependence on the government - make them think they are getting more than they are paying.


The short answer to this insane idea is ECONOMIC GROWTH - higher taxes hamper economic growth


And when the government spends money - it is not the most efficient spending of that money - so it is best to keep government spending down to limit the inefficient spending.


Someone will say - well the government builds roads, thats good so the government should take over the rest of the economy - - that is logically flawed, but you would not believe how many people cite one example and use it to justify the expansion of government.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 20, 2010 8:57 AM | Report abuse

heh, I don't think there's even a point to writing on here anymore, is there? 37th is intent on drowning out any conversation and Cillizza is just a stupid little b*tch about the whole thing.

Posted by: DDAWD | April 20, 2010 8:52 AM | Report abuse

SeniorVet

I don't know if FRAUD is brilliant - I suppose it can be debated.


Obama campaigned on bipartisanship and being post-racial - his entire campaign program has been exposed as one of the greatest FRAUDS in American History - worthy of mention next to Bernie Maddoff.

Is it brilliant to campaign one way then turn sharply to the left ? I guess the results of the next elections will contribute toward that answer.


If Obama does spark a long-term significant decline of the democratic party, then he has done something really stupid - and Obama is really close to that point.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 20, 2010 8:41 AM | Report abuse

100% more 37th than the other competing blogs


.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | April 20, 2010 8:33 AM | Report abuse

whatever would CC have to write about if there weren't polls? even the PEW report, of course not mentioning that the PEW family are longtime GOP donors. even 140 page long polls are just a trace amount of respondents considering there are 130,000,000 voters in the country. Nov/08 prez election polls had the race too close to call, and it wasn't even close. who ever votes because of what a poll says? CC you rely far too much on polls, it has made you lazy in your reporting. there was a poll done in jan/09 that said that Chip "Barack the magic negro"cd Saltzman was a racist, but CC disagreed with that one, stating that he had known Chip a long time and he was the furthest thing from a racist.

Posted by: katem1 | April 20, 2010 8:33 AM | Report abuse

Obama: A brilliant campaigner.....a mediocre leader and president...

Posted by: SeniorVet | April 20, 2010 8:19 AM | Report abuse

Obama's personal anger deserves close examination - few people in this country have been handed more affirmative action programs - pushed ahead - and in return been asked so little of in terms of job performance.

Take a serious look at Obama's resume - at no point does his job performance justify the vast opportunities and positions given to him.

Instead, each affirmative action program appears to propel Obama based solely on the color of his skin - including the Presidential election of 2008 - too many people were voting for "racial harmony" instead of an actual evaluation


_______________________________________


Yes - this is the point - at every point in Obama's resume, Obama looked NOT towards job performance for his next promotion - INSTEAD OBAMA LOOKED FOR THE NEXT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAM.

Obama's entire career has been based on ADVANTAGES GIVEN TO HIM BECAUSE OF HIS RACE.

So - DOES IT NOT LOGICALLY FOLLOW - that Obama would now look to RACE as a way to get out of his present political difficulties ???

Obama has seen his race throughout his life as a way to game the system - to get an advantage - to get a promotion - AND no where is performance involved.

So it makes sense that Obama is looking to appeal to the electorate NOT BASED ON HIS JOB PERFORMANCE IN OFFICE - BUT BASED ON SOME RACIALLY CHARGED ATMOSPHERE WITH FALSE CHARGES OF RACISM ALL OVER THE MEDIA.

This attitude is vile.


Obama is Jason Blair - he has turned everything around -

Affirmative Action has destroyed itself - the goals of affirmative action have been shredded by the very actions of the people given advantages in the system.

EVEN WORSE, affirmative action has changed the criteria it takes - merit is significantly diminished as a criteria for advancement -


It is all about CREATING A RACIALLY CHARGED ATMOSHERE AND TAKING ADVANTAGE OF IT.

Again, not something we want in our democracy - the whole thing is essentially unAmerican.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 20, 2010 8:12 AM | Report abuse


Most importantly - Obama is the first black to hold a prominent national position - and he is spoiling his own term - It is exactly in Obama's interests to have the least amount of racial tension in his term of office.


The least amount of racial tension is in everyone's interest - Obama, the parties, the country.

Instead, Obama apparently has directed his attack machine to super-charge the racial atmosphere. Obama has driven directly into the storm.

This decision is not based on what is best for Obama or even experience.

This decision is based on Obama's personal inexperience, obsession with his limited Jim Crow-era life and on Obama's personality flaws.

A public official is given the public trust to discharge his or her duties for the good of the country - not to lash out personal anger.

Obama's personal anger deserves close examination - few people in this country have been handed more affirmative action programs - pushed ahead - and in return been asked so little of in terms of job performance.

Take a serious look at Obama's resume - at no point does his job performance justify the vast opportunities and positions given to him.

Instead, each affirmative action program appears to propel Obama based solely on the color of his skin - including the Presidential election of 2008 - too many people were voting for "racial harmony" instead of an actual evaluation of experience or job performance of the candidates.

At no point in American History has a person with less experience been elected.

Even Obama's tenure in the US Senate was interrupted with a book tour and a Presidential campaign - turning his three years and nine months of experience down even further probably closer to one year of actual service.

Who in American history with that little experience has ever been elected - clearly Obama's race figured into his votes.

Which goes directly to Obama's mandate - racial harmony - exactly the opposition of what the Obama attack machine has been doing for the past month.

Obama is still relatively new in office - and his attack machine is campaigning to increase racial tensions ???

This is bad for the country.

It is really bad for Obama.

It is horrible for future black candidates who now have to overcome the doubt that their terms in office might be marked by heightened racial tensions.

This guy Obama is bad news. He is showing bad judgement like no other person to ever hold his position.

The country will be better off when he is out of office.


Posted by: 37thand0street | April 20, 2010 7:56 AM | Report abuse

omarsidd wrote:
"What's most confusing to me is, did these people (eg poll respondents) think things were going WELL during George W Bush's day? (ie, the low numbers now would imply they think things are worse now than 1.5 years ago before the election)"
====================================
Maybe they think things are worse now than 4 years ago, when the Dems took over Congress. Obama's win 18 mos ago only opened the floodgates to every Dem folly ever contemplated.
How's that,"Give our cronies a trillion, and unemployment will stay below 8%" deal working out?
How's that,"Let's go nuts on the Global Warming/"Green" Goreian agenda, and we'll have millions of new 'green' jobs" deal working out?
How's that,"Let Gov't regulate Health Insurance, and healthcare will improve/become cheaper" deal working out?
How's that,"We'll just reason with Chavez/Ahmadinejad/Kim Sung-il/Hamas, and all the problems will go away" deal working out?
How's that,"We HAVE to spend, spend, spend, or we'll go bankrupt" deal working out?
How's that,"I won't raise taxes on anyone making less than $250K" deal working out?

Posted by: OttoDog | April 20, 2010 7:38 AM | Report abuse

Clearly this nation has some serious problems right now - the liberals are throwing around the word "racist" like it is water - and it is being applied to people who simply do not agree with them - not just to actual racists.

Obama has allowed this to happen - Obama is in charge of the democratic attack machine - and Obama is personally responsible.

The truth of the matter is this: this is exactly what Obama did not want to happen - the name-calling of racism runs completely counter to Obama's interests.

First - Obama's mandate was to bring people together - to be bipartisan. For Obama to have charges of racism fly around as they have for the past month poisons the atmosphere - and it prevents Obama from claiming any progress on precisely what his mandate is.

Second - The liberals calling people racist just super-charges the partisan atmosphere - this can not be good for Obama.

Most importantly - Obama is the first black to hold a prominent national position - and he is spoiling his own term - It is exactly in Obama's interests to have the least amount of racial tension in his term of office.


The least amount of racial tension is in everyone's interest - Obama, the parties, the country.


Instead, Obama apparently has directed his attack machine to super-charge the racial atmosphere. Obama has driven directly into the storm.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 20, 2010 7:24 AM | Report abuse

What's most confusing to me is, did these people (eg poll respondents) think things were going WELL during George W Bush's day? (ie, the low numbers now would imply they think things are worse now than 1.5 years ago before the election)

And if so, what planet are they living on?

Posted by: omarsidd | April 20, 2010 7:21 AM | Report abuse

PA's 12th is a lot like NY's 23CD. Both are rural, dotted with towns. Both live and die on Federal money flowing into the district. Murtha was to the 12th what the Schusters have been to the 9th: a gravy train of highways, parks money and natural resources maintenance, lots of gov't funded projects like clinics, airports, environmental studies, local historical sites, etc.

The citizens there are not concerned about taxes -- they get far more than they pay out. The elderly population is all on social security and medicare. Younger people are involved in the services that tend to the elderly (senior transit buses abound, and home nursing, etc bring income into many younger homes). They are not afraid of government run health care -- they see how wel it works.

This will be another special election won by the Democrats, and once someone gets the two Democrats in Hawaii to talk to one another that will also be a win for the Democrats.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | April 20, 2010 7:20 AM | Report abuse

#5 is interesting, but how quickly CC forgets. It may be that 50% think Obama does not deserve re-election, but that does not mean that they would vote for a Republican. Remember the CCN poll from last week where Obama clearly beat every Republican that he was put up against. People may be disappointed in Obama, but he is clearly better than the alternatives.

Posted by: trep1 | April 20, 2010 7:15 AM | Report abuse

You know, if this is a toxic environment for the Dems, you'd never know it by looking at these special elections. Albeit a lot of them have come in strongly Democratic districts, but the Dems never even had to break a sweat. Even in this last election for Wexler's old seat, Deutch not just won, but romped by almost 30 percentage points.

And what was the big upset so far in the Congressional special elections? Bill Owens winning a seat in a district that has gone Republican for like the past 125 years or so. Obviously there were some weird circumstances, but the country is supposed to have soured on Democrats.

And now you have a Democrat running even with a Republican in a district that McCain won in 2008. McCain won narrowly, but you would think the needle has moved to the right since the 2008 elections. This poll seems to indicate this is not the case.

I'll disregard the governors elections since even the most partisan states very often cross lines for governor. I won't discount the Scott Brown election as a major win for Republicans. But perhaps that's the aberration? At least on the Congressional level, Republicans seem to be making no inroads. Now these are special elections and perhaps these recent (I'm starting with the CA-32 a year ago and discounting the earlier ones) elections are all aberrations.

Pundits are making comparisons to 1994. But perhaps one thing that's being overlooked is that in 1994, Republicans hadn't controlled Congress since Eisenhower. But in 2010, Republicans have been out of power for a mere four years. Everyone remembered the damage they had done. For young voters, they only know of Republican control. So while Dems are not especially popular right now, people aren't necessarily considering Repubs a viable alternative.

It's hard to tell with these special elections, but if you were to look at them, you would be hard pressed to make the case that the needle has moved much since 2008. If it hasn't, you can still expect Republicans to gain some seats based on the Democratic retirements in competitive districts, but the losses will definitely be less than expected.

Posted by: DDAWD | April 20, 2010 7:07 AM | Report abuse

One survey has Obama taking $994,795.00 from employees of Goldman Sachs.


Now - in any other environment - what would be the influence of that kind of money.

Somehow, I seem to remember that HILLARY was the favored candidate from Wall St - so how much money did she get?

ALL Wall Street contributions - as a regulated industry - should be banned - if they need a Constitutional Amendment to do that, fine - but the American economy rests on PROPER REGULATION.


However, the influence of the money from Wall St. to Washington has IMPROPERLY INFLUENCED THE REGULATION OF WALL STREET.

And the Democrats are the WORST offenders.

The reason the Democrats are the WORST offenders is the democratic party is the party with the anti-government rhetoric - they have committed themselves to restraining the EXCESSES OF BUSINESS - and that WHAT PEOPLE HAVE VOTED FOR THEM TO DO - and the democrats have BETRAYED THAT TRUST.

The democrats REPRESENTED THEMSELVES as the party that would act to restrain business through regulations - AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHERE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE BEEN LET DOWN AND BETRAYED BY THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 20, 2010 6:40 AM | Report abuse

One survey has Obama taking $994,795.00 from employees of Goldman Sachs.


Now - in any other environment - what would be the influence of that kind of money.

Somehow, I seem to remember that HILLARY was the favored candidate from Wall St - so how much money did she get?

ALL Wall Street contributions - as a regulated industry - should be banned - if they need a Constitutional Amendment to do that, fine - but the American economy rests on PROPER REGULATION.


However, the influence of the money from Wall St. to Washington has IMPROPERLY INFLUENCED THE REGULATION OF WALL STREET.

And the Democrats are the WORST offenders.

The reason the Democrats are the WORST offenders is the democratic party is the party with the anti-government rhetoric - they have committed themselves to restraining the EXCESSES OF BUSINESS - and that WHAT PEOPLE HAVE VOTED FOR THEM TO DO - and the democrats have BETRAYED THAT TRUST.

The democrats REPRESENTED THEMSELVES as the party that would act to restrain business through regulations - AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHERE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE BEEN LET DOWN AND BETRAYED BY THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 20, 2010 6:40 AM | Report abuse

Have you ever driven through Kansas ???

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 20, 2010 6:30 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company