Thursday, March 11, 2010

Even Democratic pollsters are seeing the writing on the wall

When your own party's pollsters wake up and smell the rage of the American public you know the only people still left drinking the Obamacare kool-aid are the DialyKos Cockkasses (yes I am very well aware of what I just said). This is amazing. From Washington Post

In "The March of Folly," Barbara Tuchman asked, "Why do holders of high office so often act contrary to the way reason points and enlightened self-interest suggests?" Her assessment of self-deception -- "acting according to wish while not allowing oneself to be deflected by the facts" -- captures the conditions that are gripping President Obama and the Democratic Party leadership as they renew their efforts to enact health-care reform.

Their blind persistence in the face of reality threatens to turn this political march of folly into an electoral rout in November. In the wake of the stinging loss in Massachusetts, there was a moment when the president and the Democratic leadership seemed to realize the reality of the health-care situation. Yet like some seductive siren of Greek mythology, the lure of health-care reform has arisen again.

As pollsters to the past two Democratic presidents, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, respectively, we feel compelled to challenge the myths that seem to be prevailing in the political discourse and to once again urge a change in course before it is too late. At stake is the kind of mainstream, common-sense Democratic Party that we believe is crucial to the success of the American enterprise.

Bluntly put, this is the political reality:

First, the battle for public opinion has been lost. Comprehensive health care has been lost. If it fails, as appears possible, Democrats will face the brunt of the electorate's reaction. If it passes, however, Democrats will face a far greater calamitous reaction at the polls. Wishing, praying or pretending will not change these outcomes.

Nothing has been more disconcerting than to watch Democratic politicians and their media supporters deceive themselves into believing that the public favors the Democrats' current health-care plan. Yes, most Americans believe, as we do, that real health-care reform is needed. And yes, certain proposals in the plan are supported by the public.

However, a solid majority of Americans opposes the massive health-reform plan. Four-fifths of those who oppose the plan strongly oppose it, according to Rasmussen polling this week, while only half of those who support the plan do so strongly. Many more Americans believe the legislation will worsen their health care, cost them more personally and add significantly to the national deficit. Never in our experience as pollsters can we recall such self-deluding misconstruction of survey data.

The White House document released Thursday arguing that reform is becoming more popular is in large part fighting the last war. This isn't 1994; it's 2010. And the bottom line is that the American public is overwhelmingly against this bill in its totality even if they like some of its parts.

The notion that once enactment is forced, the public will suddenly embrace health-care reform could not be further from the truth -- and is likely to become a rallying cry for disaffected Republicans, independents and, yes, Democrats.

Second, the country is moving away from big government, with distrust growing more generally toward the role of government in our lives. Scott Rasmussen asked last month whose decisions people feared more in health care: that of the federal government or of insurance companies. By 51 percent to 39 percent, respondents feared the decisions of federal government more. This is astounding given the generally negative perception of insurance companies.

CNN found last month that 56 percent of Americans believe that the government has become so powerful it constitutes an immediate threat to the freedom and rights of citizens. When only 21 percent of Americans say that Washington operates with the consent of the governed, as was also reported last month, we face an alarming crisis.

Health care is no longer a debate about the merits of specific initiatives. Since the spectacle of Christmas dealmaking to ensure passage of the Senate bill, the issue, in voters' minds, has become less about health care than about the government and a political majority that will neither hear nor heed the will of the people.

Voters are hardly enthralled with the GOP, but the Democrats are pursuing policies that are out of step with the way ordinary Americans think and feel about politics and government. Barring some change of approach, they will be punished severely at the polls.

Now, we vigorously opposed Republican efforts in the Bush administration to employ the "nuclear option" in judicial confirmations. We are similarly concerned by Democrats' efforts to manipulate passage of a health-care bill. Doing so in the face of constant majority opposition invites a backlash against the party at every level -- and at a time when it already faces the prospect of losing 30 or more House seats and eight or more Senate seats.

For Democrats to begin turning around their political fortunes there has to be a frank acknowledgement that the comprehensive health-care initiative is a failure, regardless of whether it passes. There are enough Republican and Democratic proposals -- such as purchasing insurance across state lines, malpractice reform, incrementally increasing coverage, initiatives to hold down costs, covering preexisting conditions and ensuring portability -- that can win bipartisan support. It is not a question of starting over but of taking the best of both parties and presenting that as representative of what we need to do to achieve meaningful reform. Such a proposal could even become a template for the central agenda items for the American people: jobs and economic development.

Unless the Democrats fundamentally change their approach, they will produce not just a march of folly but also run the risk of unmitigated disaster in November.


Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Why the TEA party movement shouldn't support JD Hayworth...

Look I know I am probably going to get a lot of flak for this but I don't care. First off for those of you who say "But Marco Rubio is challenging Charlie Crist in a primary why can't Hayworth challenge McCain?" Well, for starters the Rubio-Crist (Rubio is kicking major ass in latest polling by the tune of 2-1 literally or 60-28) is an open Senate seat in Florida, it is good that there is a primary there. It helps our party fight it out and clean house. But Hayworth is running a spiteful campaign against McCain who may not be a perfect conservative but is better than most, and if Hayworth were to knock off McCain in a primary (he most likely won't) McCain would probably run as an independent (think Ned LaMont knocking off Liberman in the Dem primary back in 2006) and could split the vote enough to give the election to the Democratic candidate. In the name of purity would you rather have that seat flip folks? For those of you who say yes go join a kook third party because that is an insane idea. It doesn't play well with the American public. Plus while I know McCain is no saint Hayworth has A LOT more baggage; don't believe me? Check out Wikipedia and other sources to check his background.
Between 1999 and 2005, Hayworth received $69,000 from lobbyist Jack Abramoff and his clients, primarily from Indian tribes. $62,000 of the money went to TEAM PAC.[14] After Abramoff was convicted of defrauding the tribes, Hayworth decided to keep the donations.
Gee, no chance the Dems would seize on that would they? Remember the whole Abramoff mess is what cost us control of the House back in 2006, why remind people about it? Also read this about his District that kicked him out of Congress back in 2006
Several prominent local Republicans also crossed the aisle to endorse Harry Mitchell in the race, including many former GOP elected office holders.[22] This defection of Republicans had a significant impact on the result of the general election: CD-5, despite having a 60% Republican active registered voter advantage over Democrats (139,057 vs 86,743 in October 2006)[23], nevertheless voted in favor of the Democrat Mitchell.
So he had a 60-40 edge in his party's favor and STILL LOST THE FREAKING HOUSE SEAT. This man is scum and the sooner people bail on him the better. Anyone in Arizona, hold your nose and vote for McCain in August, we don't need Hayworth running again

Saturday, March 6, 2010

wow... nearly 6 months...

I wonder if I still have any followers, probably not but I will be updating this site over the next week in preperation for the 2nd annual Tax Day TEA Party protest. It is only 5 1/2 weeks away so get ready everyone!