dkf
dkf's JournalWhy Voters Tune Out Democrats
Stanley B. Greenberg is the chief executive of Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, a polling company that works with center-left political parties in the United States and abroad.
My vantage point on voter behavior comes through my company, Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, and its work for center-left parties globally, starting with Bill Clinton’s presidential campaign in 1992. For the last decade, I have worked in partnership with James Carville conducting monthly polls digging into America’s mood and studying how progressives can develop successful electoral strategies. (I am also married to a Democratic congresswoman from Connecticut, Rosa L. DeLauro.)
In analyzing these polls in the United States, I see clearly that voters feel ever more estranged from government — and that they associate Democrats with government. If Democrats are going to be encumbered by that link, they need to change voters’ feelings about government. They can recite their good plans as a mantra and raise their voices as if they had not been heard, but voters will not listen to them if government is disreputable.
But in smaller, more probing focus groups, voters show they are fairly cynical about Democratic politicians’ stands. They tune out the politicians’ fine speeches and plans and express sentiments like these: “It’s just words.” “There’s just such a control of government by the wealthy that whatever happens, it’s not working for all the people; it’s working for a few of the people.” “We don’t have a representative government anymore.”
This distrust of government and politicians is unfolding as a full-blown crisis of legitimacy sidelines Democrats and liberalism. Just a quarter of the country is optimistic about our system of government — the lowest since polls by ABC and others began asking this question in 1974. But a crisis of government legitimacy is a crisis of liberalism. It doesn’t hurt Republicans. If government is seen as useless, what is the point of electing Democrats who aim to use government to advance some public end?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/31/opinion/sunday/tuning-out-the-democrats.html?_r=2&
Jack Lew's first task could be changing his signature
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/09/jack-lews-first-task-could-be-changing-his-signature/
If an executive order can limit guns, can it also restrict abortion rights?
It seems Obama is about to expand the power of the Presdency. What implications does this have on the power of executive orders and the President?
Have Presidents always had this power but declined to use it?
Republicans are saying they are willing to accept the sequester cuts.
Non-exempt defense discretionary funding sees a 9.4 percent spending reduction. This covers things, such as keeping military bases open, paying salaries and research and development.
Non-exempt mandatory defense spending sees the biggest cut of 10 percent.
Non-exempt, non-defense discretionary funding gets cut by 8.2 percent. This includes anything that Congress has to authorize each year, so programs like Head Start and AIDS assistance.
Non-exempt, non-defense mandatory programs see a 7.6 percent reduction. There’s not, however, much left to cut in this category because the large mandatory programs were largely shielded from the cuts. More on that right below.
Medicare is, well, Medicare – the health insurance program for America’s seniors. The sequester specifically limited Medicare cuts to 2 percent of the program’s budget.
http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/09/14/the-sequester-cuts-in-one-graph/
Boehner: We’re fine with defense cuts
The sequester put in place last year was supposed to be so unpalatable that both parties would have to come to an agreement. But House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) tells the Wall Street Journal that, now that tax increases are dealt with, the defense cuts in the deal don’t scare him.
He has significant Republican support, he said, for letting the defense cuts (along with drastic domestic spending cuts) take effect. “I got that in my back pocket,” he said. The sequester is “as much leverage as we’re going to get” to force Democrats to cut entitlement spending.
http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/01/07/boehner-were-fine-with-defense-cuts/
Washington Times quotes DU...featured by Drudge
CURL: Obama supporters shocked, angry at new tax increases
Sometimes, watching a Democrat learn something is wonderful, like seeing the family dog finally sit and stay at your command.
With President Obama back in office and his life-saving “fiscal cliff” bill jammed through Congress, the new year has brought a surprising turn of events for his sycophantic supporters.
“What happened that my Social Security withholding’s in my paycheck just went up?” a poster wrote on the liberal site DemocraticUnderground.com. “My paycheck just went down by an amount that I don’t feel comfortable with. I guarantee this decrease is gonna’ hurt me more than the increase in income taxes will hurt those making over 400 grand. What happened?”
Shocker. Democrats who supported the president’s re-election just had NO idea that his steadfast pledge to raise taxes meant that he was really going to raise taxes. They thought he planned to just hit those filthy “1 percenters,” you know, the ones who earned fortunes through their inventiveness and hard work. They thought the free ride would continue forever.
Read more: http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/6/obama-supporters-shocked-angry-new-tax-increases/#ixzz2HJC64pVR
Flu infections sweep America hospitalizing thousands and leaving 18 children dead of complications
2,257 people have been hospitalized since the start of flu season
Three-fourths of those with symptoms say the were not vaccinated
41 states have reported cases
While the CDC is waiting for more time to pass before classifying the season, Google Flu Trends
has already listed it as 'intense' by monitoring flu activity around the world based on internet search terms.
And roughly 4 per cent of users on Flu Near You, a real-time tracking tool gaining about 100 new participants per week, say they're experiencing symptoms.
'That's huge,' John Brownstein, an epidemiologist and assistant professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School and Children’s Hospital Boston, told NBC News. 'Last year, we never got near this.'
Brownstein is one of the founders of Flu Near You, a project, coordinated by Children’s Hospital Boston, the Skoll Global Threats Fund and the American Public Health Association.
The project has been a great tool for generating immediate data about the ongoing flu season.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2257597/Flu-infections-sweep-America-hospitalizing-thousands-leaving-18-children-dead-complications-going-worse.html#ixzz2HDdXuSGk
When you all wake up to the fact that extending the Bush tax cuts was a huge fail for Democratic
goals, remember that Howard Dean was the only Democratic politician who told you the truth.
HOWARD DEAN: I make the argument that going off the -- as you call it the curb, I call it the slope, the press calls it the cliff, is actually the best deal progressive Democrats are going to get. And here's why. One, we get the Clinton tax rates on everybody. Will it cause a problem? Yes. There will be a short recession, and it will be painful. But two, we get defense cuts. Republicans are never going to agree to that. And three, there are some human services cuts, which we're not going to like. But it's the least possible damage.
Now what do we get in exchange? A serious down payment of the deficit. The Wall Street people, who wringing their hands of this, are really full of it because what they're going to see is a big drop on Wall Street while all the hype comes and then it's going to be roaring back because finally somebody has done something serious about the deficit.
So, I think the fiscal curb, as you call it, is the best deal that progressive Democrats are going to get. And I think it's the best deal in the long run, not the short run.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1105508
@GovHowardDean: Will do the analysis today on the fiscal cliff bill but I am not optimistic about what I think I will find when I look under the hood.
@GovHowardDean: I would say this is a big long term win for the right, and a short term political win for the Democrats.
@GovHowardDean: @LaCarolina1212 . This takes middle class tax increases off the table permanently. That means the deficit has to be fixed by cuts only.
@GovHowardDean: @don94129 @GovHowardDean @ThePlumLineGS @conncarroll The only fix for Medicare costs is to pay by the patient not the procedure. Go for it!
@GovHowardDean: @sean_mcthornton @140elect @VanJones68 I don't agree. Social spending always suffers in the long run when deficits get too big.
CBO: Fiscal Cliff Deal adds $4.6 trillion to the deficit compared to previous law.
Like all of CBO’s cost estimates, our estimate for this legislation shows the effects of the legislation relative to current law at the time we did the estimate. Relative to the laws in place at the end of 2012, we estimate that this legislation will reduce revenues and increase spending by a total of nearly $4.0 trillion over the 2013-2022 period. (Also like all of CBO’s cost estimates, this estimate’s numbers for the effect of changes in the tax code—which represented the bulk of the bill—were produced by the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation. They published the details of their tax revenue estimates separately.)
From that perspective, why will the legislation increase deficits? Mostly because, under the laws previously in place, numerous tax provisions originally enacted in 2001, 2003, and 2009 would have expired. As a result, in 2013 personal income tax rates would have gone up for people at all income levels, the alternative minimum tax (AMT) would have applied to many more people, estate and gift taxes would have risen, and a number of other revenue-increasing changes in tax law would have taken effect. This legislation will prevent those changes in law from occurring or reduce their scope; hence, relative to what would have happened without the legislation, it embodies substantial tax cuts. The legislation also will boost deficits by increasing spending, mostly for refundable tax credits and unemployment compensation.
That dramatic widening of the budget deficit will increase interest payments on the federal debt, an impact that is not included in CBO’s cost estimates. The additional debt service will cost about $600 billion. Thus, if we added the estimated cost of the legislation and the related debt service to our previous baseline budget projections (which followed current law at the time), we would show additional deficits between 2013 and 2022 of roughly $4.6 trillion.[\b]
http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43835
Scare Adds to Fears That Clinton’s Work Has Taken Toll
WASHINGTON — When Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton fractured her right elbow after slipping in a State Department garage in June 2009, she returned to work in just a few days. Her arm in a sling, she juggled speeches and a trip to India and Thailand with physical therapy, rebuilding a joint held together with wire and pins.
It was vivid evidence of Mrs. Clinton’s indomitable stamina and work ethic — as a first lady, senator, presidential candidate and, for the past four years, the most widely traveled secretary of state in American history.
But after a fall at home in December that caused a concussion, and a subsequent diagnosis of a blood clot in her head, it has taken much longer for Mrs. Clinton to bounce back. She was released from a hospital in New York on Wednesday, accompanied by her daughter, Chelsea, and her husband, former President Bill Clinton. On Thursday, she told colleagues that she hoped to be in the office next week.
Her health scare, though, has reinforced the concerns of friends and colleagues that the years of punishing work and travel have taken a heavy toll. Even among her peers at the highest levels of government, Mrs. Clinton, 65, is renowned for her grueling schedule. Over the past four years, she was on the road for 401 days and spent the equivalent of 87 full days on a plane, according to the State Department’s Web site.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/05/us/politics/scare-amplifies-fears-that-clintons-work-has-taken-heavy-toll.html?hp&_r=0
This Ted Cruz guy could be dangerous,,,
http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2013/01/04/cruz-shutdown-may-be-necessary/If identity politics work, this guy seems scarier to me than Rubio.
Profile Information
Member since: 2003 before July 6thNumber of posts: 37,305
