Polls and more polls

The 2014 general election is twenty-six days away. As expected, numerous races around the country are tightening, shifting. The surprise from the latest round of polls is the shift, in some races, from dems being in the lead to ‘Pubs.

Kansas, perhaps, was the greatest surprise. Pat Roberts and Sam Brownback, a few weeks ago, were trailing significantly against their liberal opponents, Greg Orman and Paul Davis. Both ‘Pubs were behind at least 5% points, more for Roberts. A poll released this week shows a significant shift.

VOTERS TUNE IN, TURN OFF DEMS
The latest batch of Fox News polls reveal that as voters tune in to midterm contests they’re flipping past Democratic candidates as President Obama’s dire unpopularity takes its toll. In Kansas, where the president sits at 63 percent disapproval, Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., is turning his race around. Roberts leads independent Greg Orman 44 percent to 39 percent. A mid-September Fox News Poll had Orman leading 48 percent to 42 percent.
 
[After a slew of unfavorable polls, Gov. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., has also rebounded, leading Democrat Paul Davis 46 percent to 40 percent.]

Two Republican incumbents are fighting to keep their jobs in Kansas.The new Fox News poll finds both of them — Sen. Pat Roberts and Gov. Sam Brownback — have jumped ahead of their challengers.

CLICK FOR THE POLL RESULTS

“We know that partisanship tends to assert itself as Election Day nears,” said Republican pollster Daron Shaw, who conducts the Fox News poll along with Democratic pollster Chris Anderson.“And that may be happening in Kansas.”

The Senate race clearly remains competitive, as 44 percent of likely voters in Kansas back Roberts, with 39 percent for independent Greg Orman and 3 percent for libertarian Randall Batson. Yet Orman was up by six points in a two-way matchup three weeks ago (48-42 percent).

Democrat Chad Taylor withdrew from the race September 3, and subsequently the court decided a Democrat does not have to appear on the ballot.

Roberts has a bit more strength of support: 82 percent of his backers say they are certain to vote for him. It’s 76 percent for Orman.

Some 73 percent of Republicans back Roberts, while 71 percent of Democrats support Orman. Independents go for Orman by 45-34 percent. Roberts maintains his overall vote advantage because there are so many more Republicans than Democrats in the Sunflower State.

Men are supporting Roberts by 50-37 percent, while women back Orman by a narrow 40-38 percent margin. — FOX News.

If you dig deep into the polls, you will find one consistency that appears to be driving the shift—Obama’s continuing drop in favorability among voters. That increase in dissatisfaction is spreading to democrat candidates.

Alaska is another state showing a shift against dems. ‘Pub Senatorial candidate Dan Sullivan is another beneficiary of Obama’s disapproval by voters. Sullivan is now leading democrat Mark Begich 44% to 40%. Prior polls were too close to call in that race. One cause for Begich’s slide was a particularly libelous ad that Begich was forced to pull.

‘Pubs in the Arkansas, Colorado and Kentucky Senatorial races benefit in Obama’s slide as well. ‘Pub Representative Tom Cotton, leads democrat Senator Mark Pryor, 46 percent to 39 percent.

In Colorado, with its liberal-leaning metropolitan areas, a voter backlash against liberal democrats appears to be building. Mark Udall, the incumbent democrat Senator, is behind his ‘Pub opponent.

The unpopularity of ObamaCare could sink Sen. Mark Udall’s, D-Colo., re-election prospects with 52 percent saying the law “went too far.” While Obama held a 54 percent approval during Fox News 2012 exit polling in the state, he now holds a 57 percent disapproval. Rep. Cory Gardner, R-Ky., now tops Udall 43 percent to 37 percent. — FOXNewsletter, October 9, 2014.

Republicans in Colorado are much more enthusiastic than Democrats about the upcoming election, and that explains — at least in part — why the new poll shows Rep. Cory Gardner topping Democratic incumbent Sen. Mark Udall by 43-37 percent.

Among likely voters here, nearly half of Republicans (48 percent) are “extremely” interested in the election, while less than a third of Democrats (31 percent) feel that way. This could be even more important here than in some other battleground states because Colorado now votes 100 percent by mail and people can register to vote up through Election Day.

Gardner’s support is stronger, with 85 percent of his backers “certain” to vote for him compared to 80 percent of Udall’s.

Independents (+15 points), men (+17), gun owners (+29) and white evangelical Christians (+38) are more likely to back Gardner. — FOX News.

Even in Kentucky, where democrat candidate Allison Lundergan Grimes once lead Mitch McConnell, Obama is the anchor dragging her down (not to mention a particularly damning video where Grimes is seen to say she’ll vote differently, more liberally, after being elected.) A shift in the independent vote has McConnell leading, 45 percent to 41 percent.

Even projected voter turn-out appears to be shifting against the democrats. The Washington Examiner published an article with their turnout expectations.

A new Gallup poll suggests voter turnout will be low in November, with higher Republican turnout predicted… Gallup found enthusiasm higher among the GOP, a result that suggests Democrats may have a more difficult time on get-out-the-vote efforts needed to support their candidates. Among those motivated to vote, 44 percent were Republican and 28 percent were Democrats.

However, it is proper for us to remain pessimistic and work harder to win next month. We may have a shift in the polls but there is only one poll that counts, the one taken on Tuesday, November 4th, 2014.

Different vision

It’s amazing how the libs and conservatives can see the same thing and interpret that ‘thing’ so differently. Wishful thinking? Partially. Self-deception? That, too. What are we talking about? The Iowa Senate race.

Yesterday, an article appeared on Drudge. The headline read, POLL SHOCK: Dems now have 51% chance of holding Senate. According to the Washington Post, the Iowa Senate race 'leans' left towards democrat candidate Bruce Braley. The article states that two weeks ago, Joni Ernst led Braley.

The Washington Post says,

* Iowa: Two weeks ago, the model gave state Sen. Joni Ernst (R) a 72 percent chance of winning. Today she has a 59 percent chance.

The Washington Post’s own poll has Joni Ernst leading Braley 59% to 41% and they say the state is ‘leaning’ left to Braley. FOXNews ran an article about the same Iowa race using another poll. Their poll, too, had Ernst well out in front by 6 percentage points. The astounding item in all this is that the Washington Post poll has Ernst further ahead than the FOXNews/Quinnipiac University poll. Both sides see the same fact, Joni Ernst is well out in front, and both sides report that fact oppositely.

I believe the dems are grasping at straws. It is common knowledge that the closer we approach the election, the tighter the races appear. To the dems, Ernst dropping from 72% to 59%, according to their poll, means Ernst is losing.

FOX just reports that Ernst continues to poll higher than Braley by 6%. That, my friends, is the difference between FOX and the Main Stream Media. The MSM filters all news through their bias, FOX just reports the facts as they are.

***

Have you heard about the new Form 4473? What is the Form 4473? It’s the form you must complete to buy a firearm through a federally licensed dealer. What has been changed? The new form requires the buyer to state his race and ethnicity. The Obama administration changed the form, quietly, without little fanfare—until it hit the dealers.

Obama administration forcing new gun buyers to declare race, ethnicity

ATF policy irks dealers, risks privacy intrusion, racial profiling: critics
– The Washington Times – Tuesday, September 16, 2014

The Obama administration quietly has been forcing new gun buyers to declare their race and ethnicity, a policy change that critics say provides little law enforcement value while creating the risk of privacy intrusions and racial profiling.

With little fanfare, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in 2012 amended its Form 4473 — the transactional record the government requires gun purchasers and sellers to fill out when buying a firearm — to identify buyers as either Hispanic, Latino or not. Then a buyer must check his or her race: Indian, Asian, black, Pacific Islander or white.

The amendment is causing a headache for gun retailers, as each box needs to be checked off or else it’s an ATF violation — severe enough for the government to shut a business down. Many times people skip over the Hispanic/Latino box and only check their race, or vice versa — both of which are federal errors that can be held against the dealer.

Requiring the race and ethnic information of gun buyers is not required by federal law and provides little law enforcement value, legal experts say. And gun industry officials worry about how the information is being used and whether it constitutes an unnecessary intrusion on privacy.

“This issue concerns me deeply because, first, it’s offensive, and, secondly, there’s no need for it,” said Evan Nappen, a private practice firearms lawyer in New Jersey. “If there’s no need for an amendment, then there’s usually a political reason for the change. What this indicates is it was done for political reasons, not law enforcement reasons.”

ATF said the change came about because it needed to update its forms to comply with an Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reporting standard put into effect during the Clinton administration. The ATF declined to comment on why race and ethnicity information are needed in the first place or what they are used for. On its prior 4473 forms, the bureau had been collecting race data.

The BATFE is blaming Bill Clinton for this change. It’s strange that for eight years of the Bush Administration and four years of the Obama Administration, the BATFE saw no need to change the Form 4473. I don’t believe their excuse.

OMB’s race and ethnicity standards require agencies to ask both race and ethnicity in a specific manner (as done on [Form 4473]), and agencies may not ask for one without asking for the other,” wrote Elizabeth Gosselin, a spokeswoman for the ATF, in an emailed response to The Washington Times. She did not say why the agency suddenly made the change in response to a rule that was more than a decade old.

For ATF to ask for a purchaser’s race and ethnicity is not specifically authorized under federal statute, and since a government-issued photo ID — like a driver’s license — and a background check are already required by law to purchase a gun, the ethnicity/race boxes aren’t there for identification reasons, Mr. Nappen said.

“There is nothing [in ATF or OMB’s website links addressing the change in policy] that supports the requirement that ATF collect race-based information. The OMB guidance merely describes what categories of race should look like if information is collected,” Laura Murphy, the American Civil Liberties Union director for legislative affairs in Washington, said in an emailed statement.

In addition, Mrs. Murphy notes, the OMB guidance was supposed to be implemented by 2003; there’s no information given why ATF decided to make this change almost a decade later, she said.

“If there is a civil rights enforcement reason for the ATF to collect this data, I have not heard that explanation from ATF or any other federal agency,” said Mrs. Murphy.

Both the NAACP and the National Council of La Raza — the nation’s largest national Hispanic civil rights group — declined comment. — The Washington Times

The column continues at the Washington Times website. You can read the entire column here.

There is no justification, nor federal requirement for Obama to collect this information. Why are they? What purpose does it server? Perhaps, just to intimidate those who want to buy a weapon.

***

If you like single-malt Scots whisky, you may see prices going up if Scotland votes to secede from the United Kingdom.

Scottish Secession a Sobering Prospect for Scotch Whiskey Drinkers

Friday Follies for September 12, 2014

I made a mistake yesterday…a math error really. I had calculated that 110 votes were needed in the Missouri House to overturn Governor Jay Nixon’s veto. I was wrong. It was 109 votes that was needed.

At the end of yesterday’s post, I made a little rant about needing just one more vote to override the veto on SB 523 that prohibited RFID tracking of public school students. I thought the veto had been sustained. I was wrong. The veto on SB 523 was overturned. Yay!!

***

Democrats are going crazy…well more than they usually are. As November and it’s midterm election grows closer, the democrats sink deeper in the outhouse. Real Clear Politics released their Battleground poll and it’s not good—for the democrats. The poll shows them 18 points down, overall.

BATTLEGROUND POLL SHOWS DEMS DOWN BY 18 POINTS
If this week’s polling is any evidence, Democrats are facing an even tougher road come November. With President Obama’s approval sinking below former president George W. Bush’s, the latest Fox News poll finds Republicans hold the advantage as they seek to reclaim the Senate. In states with active U.S. Senate races, likely voters say they would back the Republican a 9-point margin. And when looking at the results in just the 14 Fox News battleground states the GOP edge widens to 18-point margin.  Fox News: “The president recently claimed that ‘by almost every measure’ the nation’s economy and American workers are better off now than when he took office. Voters dismiss his boast as ‘mostly false’ by a 58-36 percent margin. That includes 37 percent of Democrats who think it doesn’t ring true.”

[The battleground list: Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, North Carolina, New Hampshire, South Dakota and West Virginia] — FOX Newsletter, September 12, 2014.

The Battleground poll is not the only indicator that the dems are losing their base. Their so-call War on Women campaign is failing, too. In fact, it appears their campaign has boomeranged against them.

Dem base cracks up – WaPo: “Women surveyed [in the WaPo/ABC News poll] said they disapprove of [President Obama ] by a 50 percent to 44 percent margin — nearing an all-time low in the poll. It’s almost the reverse of the 55 percent to 44 percent breakdown for Obama among female voters in 2012, according to exit polls…His approval rating among women has slipped four percentage points from a year ago and 16 points since his second inaugural in January 2013, when his approval was 60 percent among the group. Among younger voting-age Americans, Obama’s approval rating stood at 43 percent. That marked an 11-point drop since June among those 18 to 29 years old.” — FOX Newsletter, September 12, 2014.

When you add to these polls other indicators, such as the massive override yesterday of Missouri Governor Jay Nixon’s vetos on such controversial issues as Abortion, Gun Rights, and Open Carry, it doesn’t take a genius to know that the dems are in trouble. It couldn’t happen to a better party.

***

ISIS, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIL, the Islamic State of the Levant, as Obama calls it, is at war with the US, so said Obama the other night. What’s the difference between ISIS and ISIL? The included territory. The Levant is the old 19th century name for that portion of the Mediterranean coast from southern Turkey down to the Sinai peninsula. It includes Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and…Israel. No one includes Israel as ISIS territory except Obama.

But continuing, we, as a nation, are upset at seeing a stream of barbarity by ISIS. People wonder how civilized people could do such massive murder and mayhem. The answer is quite simple. ISIS and their Islamic followers are not civilized. They have not progressed to a social and cultural level where a nation is possible. They are stuck in a primitive culture, in stasis, that grants loyalty only to the family, clan, or at best, tribe.

Tom Kratman, author, lawyer and retired US Army Lt. Colonel, wrote an article for a web-magazine. He drew on his experience, acquired during Gulf War I and later, to write why Islamists behave as they do. Kratman speaks and writes bluntly—but he knows well of what he says.

Why Are Arab Armies So Generally Worthless?

Mon, Sep 1 – 9:00 am EDT | 2 weeks ago by

http://www.everyjoe.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/lines-of-departure-arab-army.pngAs an American soldier, I found that one of the best and most satisfying things about the first Gulf War, the liberation of Kuwait, was that we’d never again have to listen to how great the Israelis were. We’d seen the Arabs, met them, and went through them like a hot knife through butter. What did Tzahal have to teach us?

It’s a complex set of problems they have, the armies of the Arab world. Here’s a true story that will illustrate a lot of that why. It’s also a story I’ve told before in the essay, Training for War1:

During Bright Star 85, the Egyptian Army, which is one of the better Arab armies, set up some tents for us as Wadi Natrun, northwest of Cairo. The officer in charge of the detail looked at the Americans, looked at the tents (which were, by the way, better than ours), looked at the Americans…

He was thinking that an American’s signature on a hand receipt would do him no good if one of those very good and very expensive tents grew legs and went to hide in a shipping container. He put his platoon in formation, held up three fingers, and announced, “I need three guards.”

Every man reached into his back pocket, pulled out a wallet and began peeling off notes. That is to say, they were offering bribes, baksheesh. The three who came up with the smallest bribes were picked to guard the tents. These three then proceeded to squat by the road, hold hands, and cry like babies.2 And it was sort of understandable that they cried because for the next four days they got no food or water except what our men gave them out of pity; their officer just didn’t care.

That’s what you fight when you fight Arab armies, and that’s why we went through them like lightning. They’re a collection of demoralized bipedal sheep, usually led by corrupt and connected human filth. Exceptions? Sure there are exceptions; I’ve met a few. That’s why we call them “exceptional.” Shazly, the Egyptian general who got the army across the Suez, was an exception. He’s dead. Baki Zaki Youssef, the then young lieutenant of engineers who figured out how to breach the sand wall on the eastern bank of the Suez is old now. That he’s also a Copt, a Christian, may also suggest something about the problems of the Muslim mass.3

The Arabs are what the sociologists like to call “amoral familists.” This means that they are nearly or totally incapable of forming bonds of love and loyalty with anyone not a blood relation. Even then, the degree of blood relation determines where loyalty legitimately lies. The saying in the area is: “Me and my brother against my cousin; me, my brother and my cousin against the world.” This not only allows a superior to extort baksheesh from non-relations, but identifies him as an idiot – a weak idiot, actually – if he does not.

The Arab private? He’s no more a coward than anybody else. Indeed, as an individual, I might rate him above, or even substantially above, the human norm. But he is just one man, alone.

With us, the very broad us within the western military tradition and some eastern military traditions, or with Israelis, who are very western, “It’s all of us against all of them. They’re toast.” With him? With that poor dumb-shit Arab private? “It’s all of them against me alone. I’m toast.” He knows no one in his unit cares about him; after all, he doesn’t care about any of them, either. They’re just not family. So when that private is placed in the loneliest position in the world, the modern battlefield? He runs or surrenders at the first sign things are going badly. (He’ll be fine as long as they are going well, though. Note: Things rarely go well.) Defeat is a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy that has been fulfilled so often at this point that an Arab who didn’t expect it probably ought be locked up for his own good.

Add in the fantasy mindset. Don’t forget “Insh’allah,” (Which is like “mañana,” but without the sense of urgency) which makes it somewhat impious to train really well since it is all the will of God anyway. Insh’allah also provides an excuse for bad behavior on the battlefield. Add in a set of social values that despise and loathe physical labor.

Militarily, they’ve got nothing going for them.4

This may piss some people off; the Israelis have routinely stomped the Arabs so badly not because the Israelis are so great. In fact, outside of a few units the Israelis are just decent citizen soldier militia, nothing very special. But fighting the Arabs even just decent militia can shine.

I suggested in footnote four, below, that there is a way to make better Arab units, but it has three severe limitations and problems. The first of these is closely related to what I said above, Arabs rarely if ever can form bonds of loyalty and love with non-blood relations. Hence, one forms units of blood relations. They will fight like hell for each other, their fathers and uncles, their brothers and cousins, and for the glory of the clan. What happens then, though?

The first problem is that the units so formed are also the power, standing and security of their clan. They can only afford to lose or to risk so much without damaging that power, standing and security. They won’t usually run. Surrender is rare indeed. Still, there comes a point when they simply have to retire in good order.

The second problem is a problem from the point of view of the government that raises the blood-based units. In an organization that is formed from a clan or tribe, the loyalty of everyone, from the rank and file to the commanding officer, is not to the government. It isn’t to the country, which is a pretty weak concept in the Arab world anyway. Family and faith matter there a great deal; countries little or not at all.

I don’t know if the third problem is inevitable, but I’ve seen it just about enough to suspect so.

Watch the commander of a battalion of the Saudi Haras al Watiny, the National Guard.5 Watch how he acts with his driver. Tactfully nose about to see what the familial relationship is with that driver. Odds are, the driver – driving, not being driven, is the prestige and power position amongst the Saudi Arabs – is the battalion commander’s uncle, hence senior in the clan. He is the real battalion commander. He exercises real political control over the battalion. He may let the youngster pretend that said youngster is in charge. The above may differ in details, but the trend generally holds.

__________

1 http://www.amazon.com/Training-War-Essay-Tom-Kratman-ebook/dp/B00JQI9TH2/ref=pd_rhf_gw_p_d_3 Note the temptingly low price.

2 Although there does appear to be a fairly strong element of bisexuality in the Arab male’s makeup, no, men holding hands doesn’t mean that.

3 I’m really not a huge fan of most people, but I’ll state for the record that if there are any people living I’d go out of my way to shake the hand of, Lieutenant Baki Zaki Youssef is not least among them. Neither would Shazly have been.

4 The Arab Legion is a partial exception to this, as is the Saudi National Guard, but they are highly limited exceptions.

5 The Haras al Watiny is the Saudi version of balance of power/separation of powers. They’re not as heavily equipped as the Saudi Army, not nearly, but they don’t need to be because they’re much tougher. Much. Personally, I quite like the Haras as, indeed, I like the Saudis.

Tom Kratman writes a weekly column, Lines of Departure, on the Every Joe Website.

After Action Report

With one exception, the primary came out much as I expected. Amendments 1, 5, and 9 passed, number 1 narrowly but the other two with very wide margins. Amendment 7 failed, again with wide margins as did Kansas City’s Street Car issue. The Amendments will be in force as soon as the election results are certified.

Great news!

On the Cass County front, Jeff Cox won against Dave Morris for Presiding Commissioner with nearly 60% of the votes and Stacey Lett won against Meryl Lange for Associate Circuit Court Judge by a larger margin against Lange than did Jeff Cox against Morris. The one disappointment was the loss by Ron Johnson against Ryan Wescoat in a race that can only be called a grudge match.

I was not surprised by any of the above. According to information I’ve been receiving this last week, I was not surprised by any of the outcomes. I was given some raw polling information taken about a week to ten days ago covering the Cox, Johnson and Lett races. The election yesterday confirmed the poll taken a week earlier.

In Jackson County, Jacob Turk will run again against Emmanuel Cleaver winning his primary race with almost 69% of the votes. I’m not sure how many times Turk has run against Cleaver, but he gains more ground every time. Perhaps this time he’ll beat out Cleaver in the Kansas City democrat enclave. Congratulations to Jacob Turk on his primary win.

The Missouri House is now complete. Three new ‘Pub legislators, elected via special election to fill three vacancies, will be sworn in on September 10th just in time for the Veto Override session. Jay Nixon had failed to fill those vacancies leaving the Republican majority weakened. With the three new legislators, the ‘Pubs once again have a veto proof margin in the House.

THE NEXT LEGISLATURE — ‘GOP regains veto-proof majority in Missouri House,’ AP: “Republicans regained a two-thirds majority in the Missouri House on Tuesday heading into a big showdown with Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon over his vetoes of tax breaks, abortion restrictions and other issues. Republicans won two of the three special elections for vacant House seats. That will give them 110 House seats – one more than the two-thirds majority required to override vetoes. Republicans already hold a two-thirds majority in the Senate. Republican Shawn Sisco, of Rolla, won in the 120th District while Republican Tila Hubrecht, of Dexter, won in the 151st District. Democrat Alan Green, of Florissant, was leading in a special election for the 67th District. The special election winners are expected to be sworn into office by Sept. 10, when lawmakers will convene to consider overriding Nixon’s vetoes of 32 bills and 136 budget sections. … The Legislature’s September agenda includes the consideration of veto overrides on a series of bills granting tax breaks to particular businesses, which Nixon contends could bust a hole in the budget. Republican legislative leaders say the measures could help the economy while overturning what they describe as misinterpretations of tax policies by the courts and the Department of Revenue. Nixon said the numerous budget vetoes were needed because of falling state revenues and to guard against the potential for the Legislature to override his vetoes on the tax breaks. Among Nixon’s other high-profile vetoes are bills extending Missouri’s one-day abortion waiting period to 72 hours and allowing specially trained teachers to carry concealed guns in public schools. The special elections were called after incumbents resigned for a variety of reasons. Republican Rep. Jason Smith, of Salem, stepped down from the 120th District seat after winning a special election to Congress in June 2013.” — PoliticMO Newsletter, August 6, 2014 and The Southeast Missourian.

Taken as a whole, the primary was good for republicans.

Happy Pre-Primary Day, Kansas and Missouri!

First, for the morning headlines…

Drudge: DOZENS FROM EBOLA-STRUCK COUNTRIES CAUGHT SNEAKING INTO USA

Now that is a disconcerting headline! Local talk-shows Friday and over the weekend were up in arms about Obama bringing two American missionaries with Ebola back to the US to the CDC research center in Atlanta. The Ebola survivor rate is between 10 to 50% depending on the version.

What makes Ebola deadly is its long incubation period, ten days to two weeks, when it masks itself with flu-like symptoms. After that point, organ failure occurs and death quickly follows.

More importantly, there is no vaccine for Ebola. That is one factor in bringing the two Americans home—the hope of developing an Ebola vaccine.

***

Jeff Cox, running for re-election for Cass County Presiding Commissioner, received a very favorable write-up from the Kansas City Star. A surprisingly fair report from that liberal, propaganda rag. It contrasted the two candidates—Cox, returning the county to its primary purpose, and paying off the massive debt created by the prior commissioners, and Morris, whose backers are those previous commissioners, Brian Baker and Bill Cook. Morris wants a return to unconstrained spending in the name of economic growth. It’s interesting that Brian Baker, one of the commissioners who supported the failed Broadband and TriGen projects, now works for the company, UAM, the company that failed to deliver those two failed projects. Hmmmm.

Can we say ‘conflict of interest’, Mr. Morris, by your mentors and backers?

***

A poll has been released on four of the five proposed constitutional amendments that will appear on tomorrow ballot. One amendment, number 7, was not polled due to ‘conflict of interest.’ It does make one wonder how #7 is doing. From what I’ve heard from the grapevine, the words, “tax increase,” is killing it.

Poll: Remington Research Group surveys ballot measures

August 04, 2014 / by

KANSAS CITY, Mo. – Remington Research Group in Kansas City conducted surveys on Tuesday’s ballot measures between July 31-August 2, showing a split between heavily supported and too-close-to-call measures less than 48 hours from election day.

Ballot measurers campaigns have raised millions to reach voters.

Screenshot 2014-08-04 08.15.47Amendment 1, also known as “Right to Farm” holds a lead but the race is too close to call. Supporters of Amendment 1 totaled 48%, with opponents at 40%, and undecided at 12%.

“Amendment 1 is going to be determined by turnout and could go either way,” Titus Bond of Remington Research Group said. “With nothing else at the top of the ballot to drive turnout it will really come down to who is more passionate about this issue. Amendment 1 supporters appear to have lost their message to Amendment 1 opponents but the ballot language may be able drive their campaign to a victory,” said Bond.

The other close race is with Constitutional Amendment 8, which seeks to create a lottery system to benefit veterans is very close with a high number of undecided voters. 41% of voters support Amendment 8, 46% oppose, and 13% are undecided. It has received far less attention than the other two races, but appears to be just as close.

Screenshot 2014-08-04 08.15.58There are two other proposed Constitutional Amendment appearing on Tuesday’s primary election ballot. Constitutional Amendment 5, which directs the state to protect 2nd Amendment gun rights, is cruising towards victory with 60% of voters supporting, 31% opposing, and 9% undecided.

Constitutional Amendment 9, which protects Missourian’s electronic communications from unreasonable searches and seizure is strongly supported by voters according to the survey. 67% of voters support Amendment 9, only 20% oppose it, with 14% undecided.

The demographics of the poll was said to match the turnout for the last four Missouri primaries.

Where is the GOP going?

I’ve written a series of posts about the internal civil war within the GOP. More and more, the GOP DC elites, Boehner, Cantor, McConnell, Cornyn, act in concert with the democrats. The latest fiasco was the debt limit increase.

PHOTO ILLUSTRATION Scene from Game of Thrones and John Boehner.Rather than fight the increase and use it to cut spending, as Boehner and others promised last year during the ‘Continuing Resolution’ battles, Boehner, et. al, dropped all opposition and submitted a ‘clean’, that is no spending cuts, no restraints, as Reid demanded.

Conservatives rally against debt ceiling ‘surrender,’ call for Boehner’s head

11:18 PM 02/11/2014, Alexis Levinson, Political Reporter

The House voted Tuesday to raise the debt ceiling with no conditions attached, and conservative groups are calling for Speaker John Boehner’s head.

The vote was 221-201, with just 28 Republicans joining 193 Democrats to vote for it. Speaker Boehner cast a rare vote in favor of the bill.

But the attacks began before the vote even took place, as soon as it was known that Boehner would bring a no-strings-attached debt ceiling hike to the floor.

“A clean debt ceiling is a complete capitulation on the Speaker’s part and demonstrates that he has lost the ability to lead the House of Representatives, let alone his own party. Speaker Boehner has failed in his duty to represent the people and as a result, it is time for him to go… Fire the Speaker,” said Tea Party Patriots co-founder Jenny Beth Martin in a statement before the vote. The statement linked to a petition to “Fire the Speaker,” and the group’s Twitter account has been tweeting since the vote asking people to call Boehner and tell him to “resign.”

Senate Conservatives Fund had a similar idea.

“John Boehner must be replaced as Speaker of the House,” reads a post on their website from before the vote.

“Instead of fighting for conservative principles, Speaker Boehner has completely surrendered to the Democrats,” the post reads, and the group launched its own petition to “Replace the Speaker.”

Club for Growth lampooned the idea, flagging it as a “key vote” for their rankings of how pro-growth members are.

“When we heard that House leadership was scheduling a clean debt ceiling increase, we thought it was a joke,” wrote Club for Growth Vice President of Government Affairs Andy Roth in an email to House offices before the vote. “But it’s not. Something is very wrong with House leadership, or with the Republican Party. This is not a bill that advocates of limited government should schedule or support.”

For America, another conservative group, also went after the House Republican leadership.

“Republicans have caved again!” reads a post on the group’s Facebook page. “They promised to fight Obama, but they’ve just announced they will raise the debt limit without any conditions … Yet another failure from the GOP and more proof it’s time to dump the leadership!”

The post is illustrated with a photo of Boehner, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, and Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy.

Freedomworks’ Matt Kibbe dubbed the vote the “Boehner debt hike,” and marked it as a key vote in their score card for members as well.

“Governing with Democratic votes to raise the debt limit with no reforms attached is an all-time low for Speaker Boehner,” Kibbe said in a statement. “Based on reports, the Boehner debt hike spends money we don’t have to increase entitlement spending and grow the debt. In other words, with the money they spend today, they’ll come back and borrow to pay for tomorrow.”

Heritage Action also knocked the bill, urging members to vote against it.

Historically, Boehner does not have a warm and fuzzy relationship with any these groups. In December, Boehner accused outside groups like these — that were criticizing the bipartisan budget deal — of “misleading their followers” and said “they’ve lost all credibility” in the wake of the government shutdown in October.

The GOP is splitting. The latest polls in the Kentucky Senatorial race has McConnell trailing significantly behind his democrat opponent. McConnell will meet a primary opponent, Matt Bevins, a strong conservative with backing from the SCF, Heritage Foundation and numerous grassroots and Tea Party organizations. According to those same polls, Bevins would beat the democrat candidate by a number of points.

It makes sense, to retain the GOP senatorial seat, for McConnell to step down in favor of Matt Bevin. He has refused to do so and apparently would rather lose the seat to the democrats than keep it for the GOP.

***

We have similar examples at the state and local levels. The Senatorial Conservative rankings were released over the last weekend. I wrote about it in an earlier post. We have another example of a ‘Pub, Roy Blunt, voting in concert with democrats.

We have more examples within our state legislature. During the veto override session last September, a significant number of so-called ‘Pub Representatives failed to support the veto overrides for bills they had voted for during the earlier regular legislative session. Locally, Donna Pfautsch, Representative for Missouri’s 33rd district, reversed her vote. Her failure to support the MO tax cut bill contributed to the failure to override democrat Governor Nixon’s veto.

When we have ‘Pub legislators supporting the policies of democrats, can we truly call them republicans? All too often, ‘Pubs, instead of opposing democrat lawlessness as exhibited by Nixon and others within Missouri, we have ‘Pubs voting in lock-step supporting the democrats.

That must end.

Bye, Bye, Miss American Pie

We were singing,
“bye-bye, miss american pie.”
Drove my chevy to the levee,
But the levee was dry.

— Don McLean, 1971

The Republican Party had great potential, building on the massive failure of Obamacare. All throughout 2013, the political forces were beginning to tilt against Obama and the democrats. Until…the Republican establishment turned against their core and attacked the Tea Party and conservatives. The ‘pubs in Washington betrayed their core, siding, time after time, with Obama, democrats and liberals. We now see the results of that betrayal in polls being released this week.

The latest Gallup Poll has some startling news. Only 25% of voters now identify themselves as Republicans. Where did those who disappeared go? 42% say they are now Independents.

Record-High 42% of Americans Identify as Independents

Republican identification lowest in at least 25 years

by Jeffrey M. Jones, January 8, 2014

PRINCETON, NJ — Forty-two percent of Americans, on average, identified as political independents in 2013, the highest Gallup has measured since it began conducting interviews by telephone 25 years ago. Meanwhile, Republican identification fell to 25%, the lowest over that time span. At 31%, Democratic identification is unchanged from the last four years but down from 36% in 2008.

Party Identification, Yearly Averages, 1988-2013

The trend, if you examine the chart above, proves the allegations that the more the ‘Pubs switch to and supports the left, the more members they lose. Historically, elections have been won by the party who wins the most of the independents. Rather than gathering those independents into the party, the ‘Pubs are alienating their core causing them to leave the party.

If that 42% suddenly decided to become a 3rd party, they would have enough members to beat both the ‘Pubs and the dems. That realization has not occurred to the ‘Pubs in Washington, and more and more, the ‘Pubs in the states. When it is time for the ‘Pubs to go to the well of core voters, they may discovered that well is dry. They’ve driven that Chevy to the levy one time too many.

The column below from the Washington Times expands on the shift of voters to independence and describes just how deep into denial are the Washington establishment

Inside the Beltway: Don’t worry, be happy, Republicans

By Jennifer Harper, The Washington Times, Wednesday, January 8, 2014

Republican foes were eager to spring upon new Gallup poll findings revealing that a mere 25 percent of voters currently identify with the Grand Old Party, compared to a record high 42 percent who call themselves independents and 31 percent who were Democrats. Is it time to gnash teeth and panic as midterm election season sets in? No, Republican strategist Matt Mackowiak tells Inside the Beltway.

“There are many dynamics at work here. You have to remember how many people also identify as conservative or liberal, and that the generic congressional ballot currently favors Republicans. You also have to consider voter motivation and enthusiasm, a force which will likely sway the election in GOP favor,” he observes. “And yes, the party must woo independents to win a national election.”

“One survey doesn’t mean more than a Democrat in a red state choosing to retire,” Mr. Mackowiak says. “I pay more attention to the decisions of Mike McIntyre than I do one Gallup poll.”

Interesting to note that a YouGov/Economist poll also released Wednesday finds that 62 percent of independent voters would not re-elect their current local representatives. So indeed, the demographic is up for grabs.

46 percent of Americans would not re-elect the current member of Congress in their district if the election were today; 45 percent of Republicans, 37 percent of Democrats and 62 percent of independents agree.

49 percent of conservatives, 40 percent of liberals and 49 percent of moderates also agree.

30 percent of Americans overall are not sure yet if they would re-elect their local member of Congress; 27 percent of Republicans, 33 percent of Democrats and 22 percent of independents agree.

27 percent of conservatives, 31 percent of liberals and 20 percent of moderates also agree.

Washington Times.

Will the ‘Pubs see the writing on the wall and reverse their attacks against their core and the party conservatives? Truly, I doubt it. They’ve embedded themselves too deeply into the Washington Ruling Class to reverse their course now.