American Elections 7 - Tips for International Followers - Why the media and political parties have it all wrong - they forgot about Independents

Sometimes the most obvious is the most difficult to see and when it comes to the American media the most obvious and most logical is most often overlooked.  Ever since Obama first ran for office there has been a peculiar Main Street media fascination with the Tea Party movement and when it comes to the liberal media, it became an obsession.

For some odd reason the Lame Street media has been afraid, fearful, and terrorized by the thought that the Tea Party and its seemingly radical right wing supporters represents a grave threat to the American political process.

If the media wants to condemn a conservative commentator they label them "Tea Party" whether they have any affiliation with the Tea Party or not.  It is the liberal way to stigmatize the on air personalities that cause so much havoc in their lives.

Yet most conservative commentators have never joined the Tea Party and view it as an element of the Republican party, not a separate institution.  So the Democrats have tried to diminish any threat from the Tea Party by talking about the splintering effect the Tea Party has on the Republicans.

I suspect they just don't get it.

The only threat to the two party system in America is their arrogance in thinking there really is just two parties in the country and their failure to see we are rapidly approaching the point of no return when more American are alienated by both political parties and their partisan nonsense when in truth there is little difference between them.

Every election we get closer to the point when there are going to be more Independents than BOTH Democrats and Republicans.  When over 50% of the public believes neither party serves the public but both parties have become their own Special Interests.

With the continuing decline in public confidence in our political parties, politicians and media and with the continued ignorance or deliberate effort by the media to disregard the growing number of Americans rejecting both political parties that day we cross the 50% threshold is rapidly approaching and will most certainly be here by 2016 or 2020.

The following is a Gallup Poll which most media failed to report on the continuing surge in the number of Independents in America.  They are the real danger to the two party system and the real hope for healing our Nation.

January 8, 2014 (first published)

Record-High 42% of Americans Identify as Independents

Republican identification lowest in at least 25 years

by Jeffrey M. Jones

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.

The results are based on more than 18,000 interviews with Americans from 13 separate Gallup multiple-day polls conducted in 2013.

In each of the last three years, at least 40% of Americans have identified as independents. These are also the only years in Gallup's records that the percentage of independents has reached that level.

Americans' increasing shift to independent status has come more at the expense of the Republican Party than the Democratic Party. Republican identification peaked at 34% in 2004, the year George W. Bush won a second term in office. Since then, it has fallen nine percentage points, with most of that decline coming during Bush's troubled second term. When he left office, Republican identification was down to 28%. It has declined or stagnated since then, improving only slightly to 29% in 2010, the year Republicans "shellacked" Democrats in the midterm elections.

Not since 1983, when Gallup was still conducting interviews face to face, has a lower percentage of Americans, 24%, identified as Republicans than is the case now. That year, President Ronald Reagan remained unpopular as the economy struggled to emerge from recession. By the following year, amid an improving economy and re-election for the increasingly popular incumbent president, Republican identification jumped to 30%, a level generally maintained until 2007.

Democratic identification has also declined in recent years, falling five points from its recent high of 36% in 2008, the year President Barack Obama was elected. The current 31% of Americans identifying as Democrats matches the lowest annual average in the last 25 years.

Fourth Quarter Surge in Independence

The percentage of Americans identifying as independents grew over the course of 2013, surging to 46% in the fourth quarter. That coincided with the partial government shutdown in October and the problematic rollout of major provisions of the healthcare law, commonly known as "Obamacare."

The 46% independent identification in the fourth quarter is a full three percentage points higher than Gallup has measured in any quarter during its telephone polling era.

Democrats Maintain Edge in Party Identification

Democrats maintain their six-point edge in party identification when independents' "partisan leanings" are taken into account. In addition to the 31% of Americans who identify as Democrats, another 16% initially say they are independents but when probed say they lean to the Democratic Party. An equivalent percentage, 16%, say they are independent but lean to the Republican Party, on top of the 25% of Americans identifying as Republicans. All told, then, 47% of Americans identify as Democrats or lean to the Democratic Party, and 41% identify as Republicans or lean to the Republican Party.

Democrats have held at least a nominal advantage on this measure of party affiliation in all but three years since Gallup began asking the "partisan lean" follow-up in 1991. During this time, Democrats' advantage has been as high as 12 points, in 2008. However, that lead virtually disappeared by 2010, although Democrats have re-established an edge in the last two years.

Implications

Americans are increasingly declaring independence from the political parties. It is not uncommon for the percentage of independents to rise in a non-election year, as 2013 was. Still, the general trend in recent years, including the 2012 election year, has been toward greater percentages of Americans identifying with neither the Republican Party nor the Democratic Party, although most still admit to leaning toward one of the parties.

The rise in political independence is likely an outgrowth of Americans' record or near-record negative views of the two major U.S. parties, of Congress, and their low level of trust in government more generally.

The increased independence adds a greater level of unpredictability to this year's presidential election. Because U.S. voters are less anchored to the parties than ever before, it's not clear what kind of appeals may be most effective to winning votes. But with Americans increasingly eschewing party labels for themselves, candidates who are less closely aligned to their party or its prevailing doctrine may benefit.

Now that we are halfway through the 2016 election cycle it is clear that the Independent will dominate in the general election, and the "outsider" candidates have demonstrated tremendous strength in the primary elections.  Both political parties are actively trying to stop the outsiders and protect the political establishment and status quo, but Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump may be more resilient than expected by the media.  

Survey Methods

Results are based on aggregated telephone interviews from 13 separate Gallup polls conducted in 2013, with a random sample of 18,871 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.

For results based on the total sample of national adults, the margin of sampling error is ±1 percentage point at the 95% confidence level.

Interviews are conducted with respondents on landline telephones and cellular phones, with interviews conducted in Spanish for respondents who are primarily Spanish-speaking. Each sample of national adults includes a minimum quota of 50% cellphone respondents and 50% landline respondents, with additional minimum quotas by region. Landline and cell telephone numbers are selected using random-digit-dial methods. Landline respondents are chosen at random within each household on the basis of which member had the most recent birthday.

Samples are weighted to correct for unequal selection probability, nonresponse, and double coverage of landline and cell users in the two sampling frames. They are also weighted to match the national demographics of gender, age, race, Hispanic ethnicity, education, region, population density, and phone status (cellphone only/landline only/both, and cellphone mostly). Demographic weighting targets are based on the March 2012 Current Population Survey figures for the aged 18 and older U.S. population. Phone status targets are based on the July-December 2011 National Health Interview Survey. Population density targets are based on the 2010 census. All reported margins of sampling error include the computed design effects for weighting.

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.

For more details on Gallup's polling methodology, visit www.gallup.com.

.     

LIBERAL HEADS EXPLODE: Kentucky’s New Lieutenant Governor Jenean Hampton

.

National Review
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/426555/kentuckys-new-gop-lt-gov-black-tea-party-activist-john-fundRead more (38 lines)review.com/corner/426555/kentuckys-new-gop-lt-gov-black-tea-party-activist-john-fund
by John Fund

November 3, 2015 11:58 PM @JohnFund

Matt Bevin’s 53 percent to 44 percent victory tonight marks only the second time in 48 years that Republicans have won the Kentucky governor’s race.

 

 

But Republicans also made history in another way. Bevin’s lieutenant governor running-mate, Jenean Hampton, is now the first African American elected to statewide office ever in the state’s history.

 

 

Both Bevin and Hampton are Tea Party activists who have never held elective office. Hampton’s path certainly represents triumph over adversity. Born in Detroit, the 57-year-old Hampton and her three sisters were raised by a single mom who lacked a high school education and couldn’t afford a television or a car.

 

But Hampton was determined to better herself. She graduated with a degree in industrial engineering and worked for five years in the automobile industry to pay off her college loans. She then joined the Air Force, retiring as a Captain. She earned an MBA from the University of Rochester, moved to Kentucky and became a plant manager in a corrugated packaging plant.

 

Jenean and husbband

Then she lost her job in 2012. She used her free time to start a career in politics and becoming active in the Tea Party. She ran a losing race for state representative in 2014 but won an early endorsement from Senator Rand Paul. She was tapped by Bevin to be his running-mate earlier this year.

 

 

“I’m aware of the historical significance. People point it out … Really, I just never think about it,” she says.“We’re different races, different sexes, he grew up in the country, I grew up in the city. We represent a broad range of the Kentucky demographic.”

Bevin and Hampton were able to hold Democrat Jack Conway to only 58 percent of the vote in Louisville, Kentucky’s largest city and home to one out of five of the state’s voters. Ads featuring the Bevin-Hampton ticket and its support for school choice apparently enabled it to improve on the city’s normal Republican showing.

.

Why the media has it all wrong - they forgot about Independents

.

Sometimes the most obvious is the most difficult to see and when it comes to the American media the most obvious and most logical is most often overlooked.  Ever since Obama first ran for office there has been a peculiar Main Street media fascination with the Tea Party movement and when it comes to the liberal media, it became an obsession.

For some odd reason the Lame Street media has been afraid, fearful, and terrorized by the thought that the Tea Party and its seemingly radical right wing supporters represents a grave threat to the American political process.

If the media wants to condemn a conservative commentator they label them "Tea Party" whether they have any affiliation with the Tea Party or not.  It is the liberal way to stigmatize the on air personalities that cause so much havoc in their lives.

Yet most conservative commentators have never joined the Tea Party and view it as an element of the Republican party, not a separate institution.  So the Democrats have tried to diminish any threat from the Tea Party by talking about the splintering effect the Tea Party has on the Republicans.

I suspect they just don't get it.

The only threat to the two party system in America is their arrogance in thinking there really is just two parties in the country and their failure to see we are rapidly approaching the point of no return when more American are alienated by both political parties and their partisan nonsense when in truth there is little difference between them.

Every election we get closer to the point when there are going to be more Independents than BOTH Democrats and Republicans.  When over 50% of the public believes neither party serves the public but both parties have become their own Special Interests.

With the continuing decline in public confidence in our political parties, politicians and media and with the continued ignorance or deliberate effort by the media to disregard the growing number of Americans rejecting both political parties that day we cross the 50% threshold is rapidly approaching and will most certainly be here by 2016 or 2020.

The following is a Gallup Poll which most media failed to report on the continuing surge in the number of Independents in America.  They are the real danger to the two party system and the real hope for healing our Nation.

January 8, 2014

Record-High 42% of Americans Identify as Independents

Republican identification lowest in at least 25 years

by Jeffrey M. Jones

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.

The results are based on more than 18,000 interviews with Americans from 13 separate Gallup multiple-day polls conducted in 2013.

In each of the last three years, at least 40% of Americans have identified as independents. These are also the only years in Gallup's records that the percentage of independents has reached that level.

Americans' increasing shift to independent status has come more at the expense of the Republican Party than the Democratic Party. Republican identification peaked at 34% in 2004, the year George W. Bush won a second term in office. Since then, it has fallen nine percentage points, with most of that decline coming during Bush's troubled second term. When he left office, Republican identification was down to 28%. It has declined or stagnated since then, improving only slightly to 29% in 2010, the year Republicans "shellacked" Democrats in the midterm elections.

Not since 1983, when Gallup was still conducting interviews face to face, has a lower percentage of Americans, 24%, identified as Republicans than is the case now. That year, President Ronald Reagan remained unpopular as the economy struggled to emerge from recession. By the following year, amid an improving economy and re-election for the increasingly popular incumbent president, Republican identification jumped to 30%, a level generally maintained until 2007.

Democratic identification has also declined in recent years, falling five points from its recent high of 36% in 2008, the year President Barack Obama was elected. The current 31% of Americans identifying as Democrats matches the lowest annual average in the last 25 years.

Fourth Quarter Surge in Independence

The percentage of Americans identifying as independents grew over the course of 2013, surging to 46% in the fourth quarter. That coincided with the partial government shutdown in October and the problematic rollout of major provisions of the healthcare law, commonly known as "Obamacare."

The 46% independent identification in the fourth quarter is a full three percentage points higher than Gallup has measured in any quarter during its telephone polling era.

Democrats Maintain Edge in Party Identification

Democrats maintain their six-point edge in party identification when independents' "partisan leanings" are taken into account. In addition to the 31% of Americans who identify as Democrats, another 16% initially say they are independents but when probed say they lean to the Democratic Party. An equivalent percentage, 16%, say they are independent but lean to the Republican Party, on top of the 25% of Americans identifying as Republicans. All told, then, 47% of Americans identify as Democrats or lean to the Democratic Party, and 41% identify as Republicans or lean to the Republican Party.

Democrats have held at least a nominal advantage on this measure of party affiliation in all but three years since Gallup began asking the "partisan lean" follow-up in 1991. During this time, Democrats' advantage has been as high as 12 points, in 2008. However, that lead virtually disappeared by 2010, although Democrats have re-established an edge in the last two years.

Implications

Americans are increasingly declaring independence from the political parties. It is not uncommon for the percentage of independents to rise in a non-election year, as 2013 was. Still, the general trend in recent years, including the 2012 election year, has been toward greater percentages of Americans identifying with neither the Republican Party nor the Democratic Party, although most still admit to leaning toward one of the parties.

The rise in political independence is likely an outgrowth of Americans' record or near-record negative views of the two major U.S. parties, of Congress, and their low level of trust in government more generally.

The increased independence adds a greater level of unpredictability to this year's congressional midterm elections. Because U.S. voters are less anchored to the parties than ever before, it's not clear what kind of appeals may be most effective to winning votes. But with Americans increasingly eschewing party labels for themselves, candidates who are less closely aligned to their party or its prevailing doctrine may benefit.

Survey Methods

Results are based on aggregated telephone interviews from 13 separate Gallup polls conducted in 2013, with a random sample of 18,871 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.

For results based on the total sample of national adults, the margin of sampling error is ±1 percentage point at the 95% confidence level.

Interviews are conducted with respondents on landline telephones and cellular phones, with interviews conducted in Spanish for respondents who are primarily Spanish-speaking. Each sample of national adults includes a minimum quota of 50% cellphone respondents and 50% landline respondents, with additional minimum quotas by region. Landline and cell telephone numbers are selected using random-digit-dial methods. Landline respondents are chosen at random within each household on the basis of which member had the most recent birthday.

Samples are weighted to correct for unequal selection probability, nonresponse, and double coverage of landline and cell users in the two sampling frames. They are also weighted to match the national demographics of gender, age, race, Hispanic ethnicity, education, region, population density, and phone status (cellphone only/landline only/both, and cellphone mostly). Demographic weighting targets are based on the March 2012 Current Population Survey figures for the aged 18 and older U.S. population. Phone status targets are based on the July-December 2011 National Health Interview Survey. Population density targets are based on the 2010 census. All reported margins of sampling error include the computed design effects for weighting.

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.

For more details on Gallup's polling methodology, visit www.gallup.com.

.     

Debbie Wasserman Schultz - She's No Sarah Palin

.

Obama's Democrat Mouthpiece Toes the Obama Line

If you are not a professional politician or member of the Lame Street Media then by now you must be missing the over-shadowing presence of one Sarah Palin from the daily campaign scene.  No one politician has ever rattled the cages of the establishment and liberal media like Palin and it did not matter if she did or said anything.  As long as she was a viable spokesperson for the Tea Party, the Momma Grizzlies or any other group of anti-establishment people, she riled the liberal media and Democrats like no one could.

By the end of the 2008 campaign the GOP lost the election but by only 7% of the vote.  With Obama running against the most unpopular president in history, the economy in a shambles, America in decline, two endless wars killing our youth, millions losing jobs and millions more losing their homes, it is hard to believe Obama could not win by a landslide.

Palin was most responsible for keeping the GOP ticket in the race, a fact that will never be agreed to by the media and Democrats whose faces still turn red with hatred or envy when they think of this shotgun toting Alaska firecracker.

Well Obama must have wanted his own Sarah Palin knowing that she was the only thorn in his side during the campaign so he named his answer to Sarah, a Congressional Democrat named Debbie Wasserman Schultz from Florida.

In some ways she has seemed to parrot Sarah Palin because she has demonstrated an ability to polarize the public, to annoy the Republicans with her half baked arguments against anything relating to the GOP, and with her total disregard for Republicans, Independents and reality.

However, she is just an Obama spokesperson and no Obama spokesperson is allowed to have a mind of their own or a concern for anything non-Obama.  If one were to fact check her stream of consciousness blurted out in sound bites over the liberal media every day it would take a virtual encyclopedia to correct the record.  Then again, she uses the traditional political party spokesperson model of throwing truth to the wind when talking to the people.  Forget the facts, just stick with the party line.

Wasserman Shultz is no Sarah Palin and her attempts to emulate the success and power of the conservative media star of the Tea Party have about as much chance of succeeding as the Obama economic recovery program.

Many a politician tried to control Palin and failed.  Even the McCain campaign could not silence her and her ideas on what was wrong with America.  Long after she lost the election her bitter enemies continued to try and destroy her reputation and her life but she survived attack after attack and made herself into something of a folk hero for standing up to the ruthless establishment in Washington, D.C.

Slowly the Obama party line voiced by Debbie Wasserman Schultz may just draw the real Sarah Palin back in to the presidential campaign as a counter point to the deluge of babble and we most surely could use the common sense and lightning impact of Sarah in offsetting the billion dollar re-election campaign promised by the president.

Stay tuned...

.

Obamaville - February 1 - Florida Primary Recap

.

GOP Candidates Take Aim at Obama Economy

The people spoke and once again the pundits are wrong.  Just last week The New York Times said Newt Gingrich had a 73.3% chance of winning the Florida primary.  He got buried by 14% by the Romney organization.  But the real story which should be of concern to Obama's Chicago campaign team was the breakdown of the vote.

Romney strengthened his position in nearly every important demographic including women, the Tea Party, Catholics, conservatives, Latinos and others who make up the core of the Independent vote in America.  Slowly but surely, as if a slumbering elephant coming back to life, the message of Mitt Romney is starting to resonate with the voters.

America's future is about jobs and strengthening the economy.  It is not about excuses.  It is about promises broken and policies gone wrong.  It is about a regulatory assault on small business and the American economic engine.  It is about a president who chooses to ignore the reality of capitalism and who pins his hopes on three years of failed social engineering.

It is about a track record of enthusiastic promises, followed by dismal results.  In a word, it is about the difference when the president of the United States fails to provide leadership, even when he controlled the congress.  The president blames Republicans for all his many woes yet he did nothing to change the massive problems he so successfully articulated when he controlled the House and the Senate for two years with a solid Democratic majority.

A $16 trillion national debt.  A trillion dollar budget deficit every year he has been preisdent.  No strengthening of Social Security or Medicare.  An increase in unemployment.  A recovery that has failed to restore 5 million jobs lost in the recession.  Stimulus and bailouts that failed to generate economic growth. A failuire to even address the need for energy independence.  A health care reform program, Obamacare, that has seen health care costs and health insurance premiums continue to soar.  The collapse of the housing market and failure to address the foreclosure nightmare.

For the first time in post election speeches the three major candidates focused on the president and not each other.  Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul each gave passionate and quite different attacks on the president's performance since being elected and laid out a wealth of ideas on how the president is vulnerable.

Romney won the primary handily and there is evidence the GOP is coming together in their mission to stop Obama from further damaging the America the people want to see restored.  No matter how much trivia the media and White House throw at Romney and the other candidates, no matter how negative the campaign ads may get, all Republicans and about 50% of Independents are becoming united in the determination to throw out the politicians including President Obama.

The worst fear of the president is that he might have to run on his record as president.  Because when it comes to domestic issues there is no record.  You cannot defend doing nothing and contributing to the malaise in our nation's capitol.

Stay tuned for the next efforts of the media and Obama administration to try and divert attention from the record.  The Congressional Budget Office (non-partisan) and many others keep warning us that we are far from out of the economic danger and we are doing nothing to address the long term problems facing our nation.

.  

Colorado Post Election Report - A Grassroots View

.

Colorado was one of the most watched states in the election because it is the most like Massachusetts and Connecticut in terms of liberal leaning while still being a bedrock of conservatism and Tea party affiliation.  Having spent much of my youth and later years visiting my many first cousins thoughout Colorado, not to mention a few ski trips later, I have watched the development of the state over the years.

The battle between conservationists and developers, the influx of California residents, the tourist demands, the fights over water rights and the Platte and Colorado River water compacts, the battle for political control between liberals and conservatives, between urban and non-urban areas, and on and on.

My old friend Ed O'Connor moved to Colorado and his insights as a political activist yet outsider gives him a unique view of the Colorado political landscape.  His pre-election report was excellent for a non-reporter and his post-election report that follows is even better.  Sometimes the people see so much more than the experts and professionals.  Thanks again to Ed and the people of Colorado.

When I praised Ed for his first article and how it helped people understand the Colorado political landscape he rsponded, "That May be their downfall if they think I'm an informed one."  Here is his post election recap.

Overall I was pleased with the elections results except for Not winning the Senate. This election was not about local issues and had national ramifications no matter what state you lived in. As for Colorado:

I had picked the incumbent Congresswomen (Betsey Markey) from my district 4 to lose and she did lose big time. Her vote for Obamacare and Cap & Trade pretty much sealed her fate.

I really thought Buck would win the Senate but it amazes me what can be made into an ad and because of his stand on abortion and immigration, they had enough ammo and I think he lost the independent vote (especially the women) in the bigger cities. Bennet also talked like he was much more conservative then he is. And the fiasco for the Governor's office didn't help him at all in my opinion.

The good news is it looks like a Republican House of Reps here in CO which I am happy about but still have to deal with an anti-gun, pro illegal immigrant governor and Senate.

Tancrado had too much history behind him to win a state wide election and the Republican candidate Maes was abandon by almost everybody because when Tancrado entered the race we knew neither one could win in a three way race and no one knew Maes or his background.

I donated more money to out of state candidates then ever and I think that will be the trend from now on as every election is a national election and these people who vote for a candidate who says he is going to do all these things by himself (especially for a state) are fooling themselves.

I hope the voters in the future learn you have to look at every election as a chance to advance your party's or your agenda and not what a candidate says he is going to do for the state. If your party is not in the majority you have a pretty hard time advancing your ideas and legislation at the federal level.

And the same outlook needs to apply to a state office. Party trumps person in our system.

And finally: I am a big believer in changing the Republican party rather then trying to start a third party such as a Tea Party. That would really screw things up. I like the Tea Party agenda but it needs to be brought into the Republican tent or vice versa so as not to split the vote. Politicians like Lindsey Gramm and McCain need to be retired and put on the shelf. 2012 is going to be even more polarizing after two years with this new congress.

That is my 2 cents worth and that is the true value which may also be the value of the dollar when the Federal Reserve gets done.

Ed O'Connor
Colorado
.

Election Recap in Images not Words - Two Short Years in America

.