Nemo me impune lacessit

No one provokes me with impunity


No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

Article 1, Section 9, Constitution of the United States

If this is the law of the land...why in a republic (little r) and as republicans, do we allow mere POLITICIANS to the right to use a "title of office" for the rest of their lives as if it were de facto a patent of nobility. Because, as republicans, this should NOT be the case...just saying...

The Vail Spot's Amazon Store

Chris Muir's Day by Day

Saturday, January 23, 2010

Poll In MA Heralds Election Disaster for Dem's in November

The Washington Post's new poll shows just how angry middle class voters are. They are pissed that the Obama Administration has utterly ignored the recession and attempted to ram through a government seizure of health care that only the far left of the Democratic Party desires. The "stimulus package" that was supposed to keep unemployment down below 8% has utterly failed, and is now recognized as being a political pay off of Democratic Party constituencies. A significant majority in the most liberal state in America now believe that the direction this government has chosen is the wrong one.

Voter remorse has increased among moderates to an extraordinary degree. Conrad Black, in a scathing column, calls Mr. Obama, incompetent and says that many are recognizing this as well.
Peggy Noonan, Ronald Reagan's leading speech-writer, and now one of the leaders of the Obama Buyers' Remorse Movement, wrote, 'cold and faux eloquent.' He is fluent and sonorous, but rather vapid. And now, Maureen Dowd, foxy doyenne of New York Times columnists and pin-up girl of the D.C. Democratic establishment, niece of FDR's top fixer, former co-leader, with Michelle, Caroline Kennedy and Oprah Winfrey, of the Obama massed, synchronized cheerleaders, has apostacized and reviled the president as a nasty egotist.
A poll taken this week and sponsored by The Washington Post, the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation and Harvard University's School of Public Health shows just how significant voter anger is, and how it has turned against Democrats in Washington, D.C. as well as demonstrating how dramatically the political landscape has fundamentally shifted during Mr. Obama's freshman year in office.
The findings do not provide a political portrait of the entire country in the opening weeks of the 2010 election year. But given that Massachusetts has been reliably Democratic in presidential elections, the results of Tuesday's special Senate election and the reasons voters sided with Brown over Democrat Martha Coakley speak to broader shifts that have taken place across the country over the past year.

These changes were echoed in national polling and helped elect Republican governors in Virginia and New Jersey in November. Democrats have been put squarely on the defensive. Obama and Democratic leaders are looking for ways to alter the political dynamics in the hope of heading off potentially sizable losses in their congressional majorities in this November's elections

--63% of Massachusetts special election voters think the country is seriously off-track.
--Brown got two-thirds of them.
--Almost two-out-of-three Brown supporters intended their vote as an opposition message to Democrats in D.C.
--47% say the federal government is doing too many things better left to individuals and business.
--75% of Brown voters want him to work with both parties.
--58% of Tuesday's voters don't like what Republicans are doing either, whatever that is.
--43% of Massachusetts' Tuesday voters like the Obama-congressional healthcare bills. But 48% don't..

Yet Mr. Obama insists that he will "double down" on his agenda and continue to try and ram though an increasingly unpopular health care bill. Furthermore, he has signalled that he will have the "Cap & Trade" on his desk by fall, no matter how much damage that bill will do to an already distressed economy. If Mr. Obama continues with his attack on the US economy, Democrats in may see the loss of more than 100 seats in the US Congress as well as the loss of 16 of the 17 Senators up for reelection.

Michael Barone, in the Washington Examiner has echoed this prediction with some statistical evidence that show only 103 Democratically held seats in the House can be considered "safe." His research shows that,
there’s a pattern here: Coakley carries districts where Obama got 65% or more of the vote and runs essentially even in the district where he got 64%, and Scott Brown runs ahead in districts where Obama got less than 64% of the vote.

Let’s extrapolate those numbers to the nation as a whole and assume that a district that voted 64% or more for Obama is safe for Democrats even under the most dire of circumstances. How many such districts are there? Answer, according to this source: 103. The other 332 districts voted 63% or less for Obama. Interestingly, there are more 64%+ Obama districts in the West (36) than in the East (27) and more in the South (21) than in the Midwest (19).

All but two of the 103 Obama 64%+ districts are represented by Democrats. The two exceptions are Louisiana 2, where Republican An Joseph Cao beat Democrat William “Cold Cash” Jefferson in a December 2008 runoff, and Florida 19, whose incumbent Robert Wexler resigned and a special election will be held in April...
So that means that 101 of the 256 House Democrats represent 64%+ Obama districts and that 155 House Democrats represent districts which might, according to the Massachusetts metric, be vulnerable in some circumstances to Republican capture. No wonder so many House Democrats refused to vote for the Senate health care bill—enough to prompt Speaker Nancy Pelosi to say publicly that “unease would be a gentle word” to describe their attitude toward doing that.
So it would seem that Mr. Obama is intent on political suicide and desires to take the Democratic Party with him...

No comments: