Now that the dust has settled, the political pundits have responded, and the world has watched in wonder at our strange democratic system of government, where do we go from here? As for me, I don't believe the politicians from either party nor the national news media and their preoccupation with generating revenue.
The Republicans didn't win, and the Democrats didn't lose. Obama might have been stung by the results and the Tea party certainly did rock the Obama agenda to it's core. Yet as the couple of hundred newly elected officials take office, what does the scorecard show?
On the domestic front
We still have the unfunded Obama agenda with up to $3 trillion in unanticipated cost
The deficit is still $1.4 trillion a year
The debt ceiling will pass $14 trillion this year and $15 trillion next year
The housing and foreclosure crisis remains untouched and unresolved
Financial reform forgot to crack down on hedge funds that brought about the economic collapse
Campaign reform is forgotten as record campaign costs passed $2.5 billion in 2010
Our aging infrastructure needs about $2 trillion to fix what is broken
Health care and insurance premiums continue to spiral up in costs
The more we spend on education the dumber our kids get
We still have no energy independence or alternative energy policy
In foreign affairs
The world economy continues to struggle because of US dominance
In Iraq 50,000 troops can't stop the bloodshed
The new Iraq government was influenced more by Iran than the USA
Sanctions did not stop Iran's nuclear program
Afghanistan remains loyal to Iran in spite of over 100,000 troops and billions a week cost
Obama embraced India while shunning Pakistan our other ally
The Federal Reserve infuriated the world with the $1 trillion "quantitative easing" policy
Germany, UK and France all condemned the Obama backed Fed policy
With the Fed driving down the value of the dollar, America gains at everyone else's expense
Israel and the Palestinians are light years from peace
Israel continues to build settlements
Over 2 million American troops remain overseas but only 150,000 are fighting
China and America remain at odds over currency valuations
America can't even get a trade agreement with our strongest ally in Asia, South Korea
Mexico lost 30,000 lives to America's drug war
South America feels more ignored than ever by the USA
As you see, we have a huge and largely unfulfilled agenda and where action was taken the result was not what we sought. However, you will never be informed of the true problems we face if you do not understand the issues and if you rely on the media and their news in a nutshell attitude. The problems we face require a lot more than 30 second sound bites to solve.
In the days ahead I will review the pros and cons of these issues. Where I can I will offer solutions to the problems or attempt to identify the path to success. If we do not embrace this agenda we will never be the shining light to the world we should be and that the world so desperately needs to survive. .
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.
I think we get so caught up in the two party propaganda we forget that there is a whole lot of America that cannot be found in the Democrat or Republican parties. Preliminary estimates are that about 87 million voted in the Midterm election. That would be about 40% of eligible voters, down significantly from the 60% turnout and 132 million who voted in the 2008 Presidential election. A 20% drop off between Presidential and non-presidential election years is not surprising but a little sad.
However, that means 131 million eligible voters did not participate in the election this year, about 60% of the people. How about some meaningful math? There are about 232 million Americans of voting age. About 94% are eligible to vote, about 218 million. The other 6% are ineligible for reasons ranging from criminal records to immigration status.
Of the eligible to vote, 80% are registered to vote, about 175 million. That means 43 million people who are of voting age and eligible to vote choose not to participate in the voting process. As for the 175 million registered voters, about 64 million are Independents, 60 million Democrats and 51 million Republicans. You can see why the Independents swing the election. Obama and the Democrats won the Independents in 2008 and won the election. The Republicans won the Independents in 2010 and won the election.
I have long advocated that it is a shame the greatest Democracy in world history only has 40-60% of the eligible voters participating in the election. To correct this we should treat federal elections with the importance they deserve. We have a holiday for dead presidents and others but no holiday for the one day when we exercise the most important right guaranteed by our Constitution, our individual freedom to vote.
A national holiday should be declared to take place every other year on presidential and non-presidential election day and all government, commerce and industry should be shut down to allow everyone to vote.. I mean this is the most important thing we can do as Americans to honor our Founding Fathers. Voter registration must be improved to reach the voting age people through the Internet, computers, driver license records and any way possible.
Can't we give up one day every other year to honor our heritage and strengthen our participation in the process of Democracy we have fought for 234 years to protect? That way the majority will truly rule and 131 million people won't be ignored. Sounds American to me. .
Almost every day of the week the bastions of the liberal media, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Time and Newsweek Magazine, MSNBC, even the Huffington blog run feature stories about Sarah Palin. If they dislike her so much, why?
Because Palin draws reader interest more than any other politician in America. Palin is plastered in the liberal media to sell the liberal media, pure and simple. The same way one of the top and most sought after celebrities for TV talk shows is none other than Sarah Palin. Oprah, Letterman, Leno, even Saturday Night Live see huge increases in ratings whenever Palin or her clone Tina Fey appear and that means higher ad rates and that means lots more money for the liberal media.
Nothing wrong with that, on the conservative side Roger Ailes was well aware of her ratings impact when he signed her to the Fox News network. She has been a welcome addition to Fox Shows like O'Rielly, Hannity and Beck because their audience increases and the ad rates increase. It is why Fox News continues to clobber the cable competitors in the Nielsen ratings.
Today, because finding a positive article about Palin is so hard to do in the liberal media, I'm going to showcase the dreaded Washington Post and a recent Palin article that appeared. In addition, Sarah Palin should be allowed to speak for herself for a change. She issued, in her own words, her version of what happened inthe elections. You should watch the video and get her version of what she thinks.
The Washington Post
Five myths about Sarah Palin
By Matthew Continetti Sunday, October 17, 2010
Think you know Sarah Palin? The former Alaska governor has been in the spotlight ever since John McCain named her as his running mate on Aug. 29, 2008. Yet, while practically everybody has an opinion about Palin, not all of those opinions are grounded in reality. Many of them are based more on a "Saturday Night Live" caricature than on the living, breathing, 46-year-old mother of five. The real Sarah Palin is a complex woman who has risen in no time from obscurity to the stratosphere of American politics, fusing celebrity and populism in novel ways. Now that she's laying the foundation for a possible presidential run in 2012, it's worth taking a moment to separate the facts about Palin from the fables.
1. Palin cost McCain the 2008 election.
She didn't. CNN's 2008 national exit poll, for example, asked voters whether Palin was a factor when they stepped into the voting booth. Those who said yes broke for McCain 56 percent to 43 percent.
Before Palin's selection, remember, McCain suffered from an enthusiasm gap. Republicans were reluctant to vote for the senator from Arizona because of his reputation as a maverick who'd countered his party on taxes, immigration, drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and "cap and trade" climate legislation. But Palin's conservative record in Alaska and antiabortion advocacy changed the Republican mood. With her by his side, McCain's fundraising and support from conservatives improved. It wasn't enough to beat Barack Obama -- but McCain probably would have lost the presidency by a greater margin if he had, say, selected independent Sen. Joe Lieberman as his running mate, further alienating the GOP base.
Yes, it's possible that Palin's conservatism and uneven performance on the campaign trail shifted some voters to Obama's column. But even if Obama picked up some anti-Palin votes, he surely didn't need them: The economy was in recession, Wall Street was in meltdown, and the incumbent Republican president was incredibly unpopular. In the end, it's impossible to know how McCain would have performed if he hadn't selected Palin -- politics does not allow for control experiments.
2. Resigning as governor was rash.
No one expected Palin's resignation on July 3, 2009, just 2 1/2 years into her term. Her hastily composed and clumsily delivered farewell address left many observers confused about her motives. Some of her critics were only too eager to fill in the gaps with conjecture and hearsay (She's being investigated by the FBI! Sarah and Todd must be headed for divorce!). If there was one thing everybody knew for sure, it was that Palin's career in politics was over.
But none of the rumored scandals ever broke. The Palins remain married. And as for Sarah Palin's career, it's taken off. She plays a far greater role in American public life than she did before she left office.
When Palin returned to Alaska after the 2008 campaign, she confronted three problems. The political coalition on which she had based her governorship -- a combination of Democrats and renegade "Palinista" Republicans -- had collapsed. Her critics were using Alaska's tough ethics laws to launch investigations into her behavior, sapping her finances and her energy. Finally, every time she traveled to the Lower 48, Alaskans criticized her for putting her political interests above the state's.
Palin's solution was to resign. Her agenda stood a better chance of passing if then-Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell, who shared Palin's goals, succeeded her as governor. As a private citizen, meanwhile, Palin could make enough money to pay her legal bills. And she would no longer be accused of neglecting her official duties.
Some might say that Palin's resignation was shortsighted and showed that she was not ready for the demands of executive office. But if Palin had remained governor, she would have been denied opportunities to rally the tea party and fight in the battle over the Obama agenda. She would have been stuck on a regional stage. Instead, she's back on the national one.
3. Palin and the tea party are destroying the GOP.
You've heard the spiel: The Republican Party is in the midst of a civil war between moderate incumbents and far-right challengers backed by Palin and the tea party. Driving Charlie Crist from the GOP and defeating establishment figures such as Robert Bennett, Lisa Murkowski and Mike Castle spells electoral doom for the party. The only chance Republicans have for long-term success is to move to the center in a bid to win over millennials and Latinos.
But demographics aren't destiny, and no one knows what the future holds. The reality, right now, is that Palin and the tea party are saving the GOP by dragging it back to its roots and mobilizing conservative voters.
Remember, by the time Palin arrived on the national scene, the Republican Party was depleted, exhausted and held in disrepute. An unpopular war in Iraq, an economy in recession and GOP corruption had driven away independents. Meanwhile, massive government spending and a liberal immigration policy had dispirited conservatives.
This is where Palin came in. In the wake of Obama's historic victory, she and countless other grass-roots activists could have abandoned the GOP and turned the tea party into a conservative third party. They didn't. They decided instead to refashion the Republican Party from the ground up, pressuring it to live up to its limited-government ideals. Now, two years after Obama's win, Republicans are poised to reap major gains in the midterm elections. Palin and the tea party haven't hurt the GOP one bit.
4. Palin is extreme.
On many of the most important issues of the day, Palin holds positions that are squarely in the center-right of American political discourse. And many of those positions, not incidentally, are held by a large segment or even a majority of the public. For instance, neither the public nor Palin believes the stimulus worked. And while most Americans may not share Palin's views regarding "death panels," many join her in opposing Obama's health-care overhaul.
Over the past two years, Pew and Gallup surveys have tracked the public as it has moved to the right -- not on just one or two issues but on a whole constellation of them. Even on the controversial topics of abortion, guns and same-sex marriage, Palin is not as far away from the center as some suppose. A May 2009 Gallup poll, for example, found that a majority of Americans identified as "pro-life" rather than "pro-choice." In October 2009, Gallup measured record-low support for gun control. The public is divided on same-sex marriage, with about half the country joining Palin's (and Obama's) opposition.
5. Palin is unelectable.
Without question, a Palin 2012 campaign would be an uphill battle. Palin is unpopular -- massively so among Democrats, decisively so among independents. Even many Republicans don't believe she's ready to be president.
But opinions can change. Look at the political resuscitations of Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and Hillary Rodham Clinton. If Palin works hard and runs an impressive campaign, wavering Republicans and skeptical independents may give her a second look.
To earn that second look, she may need to find a big idea. It's hard to become president without one. Reagan had supply-side economics and the end of detente with the Soviets. Bill Clinton had the third way. George W. Bush had compassionate conservatism and the freedom agenda. Obama had national unity and hope and change.
At the moment, however, Palin still expresses her agenda mainly in negative terms, focusing on her opposition to Obama and the Washington establishment. She hasn't defined her "common-sense conservatism" in positive language. And she hasn't found a unifying, exhilarating theme.
Then again, she just might get along without one. After all, a presidential contest is a choice. The public might not love Palin. But by 2012, Americans might absolutely despise Obama. Two more years of a bad economy and an unpopular Afghan war, and anything is possible. Yes, there's a ceiling to Palin's support. But in 2012, there also will be a ceiling to Obama's.
Whose will be higher?
Matthew Continetti is opinion editor of the Weekly Standard and the author of "The Persecution of Sarah Palin: How the Elite Media Tried to Bring Down a Rising Star."
You would think something as historic as the Midterm election would get some top grade news media coverage but I found the cable news coverage to resemble the same partisan game they always play with the same biased hosts and the same strategy of trying to make the bad guys, those who disagree with them, look bad. Only NBC of the broadcast networks had prime time coverage but even that paled in comparison to the good old days of network news.
If you tuned into MSNBC coverage last night you saw what was wrong in America. From the moment the first returns started coming in the MSNBC mouthpieces went ballistic. Why in the world did NBC, owner of the liberal network, think a panel of partisan liberal radicals composed of Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, Ed Schultz, Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O'Donnell be fair and balanced in the election coverage?
As the sea of red Republican wins moved steadily across the TV screen the gang got more hostile and when they interviewed any GOP winners they were furious as they tried to trap people into making mistakes or were asking stupid questions having nothing to do with the election.
Sadly the fury continued into the morning news shows when Matthews and O'Donnell had to be silenced because of their confusing rants against the GOP. The network would have been far better served with doing exit interviews with the losers than insulting the winners and viewing public with their rage.
NBC, the only major network to give prime time coverage, still could not help themselves from taking the liberal slant as almost every time they showed a Republican winner Brian Williams would make some scripted musing about the problems or mistakes that winner made during the campaign. Though I didn't watch the entire broadcast, not once while I watched did I hear him say anything good about the Tea Party and GOP winners.
CNN, as usual, heavily weighted their panels with Democrats but the news did not seem to rile them up like the MSNBC gang. Still, for all the technology available to them they often seemed confused and could not quite get the numbers right when giving updates. At best it was an awkward performance.
Fox News, the defender of the right, of course played up the GOP victories and even tried to give the Tea Party credit where credit was due but having partisan talking heads instead of reporters kept it from being a news show.
The Exit interviews collected by the network pool continue to be plagued by huge mistakes and any use of the interviews to project winners should be banned. Not once in the last several elections have the exit interviews been close to right but CNN continues to throw them on the screen.
All in all it was a dismal performance by our news media but not unexpected as mediocrity in media is the new standard on American television. It was a good night to watch a movie. .
Highly regarded for his principled, energetic and idea-driven leadership, Marco Rubio won a three way battle for U.S. Senate fighting off numerous trips by Obama and leading Democrats and efforts to split the GOP vote in 2010. His humble and honest acceptance speech after the victory was one of the highlights of all speeches by candidates. Take a moment to listen to this 39 year old rising star.
In 1971, Marco was born in Miami to Cuban-born parents who came to America following Fidel Castro’s takeover. When he was eight years old, Rubio and his family moved to Las Vegas, Nevada where his father worked as a bartender at the Sams Town Hotel and his mother as a housekeeper at the Imperial Palace Hotel. In 1985, the family returned to Miami where his father continued working as a bartender at the Mayfair House Hotel until 1997. Thereafter he worked as a school crossing guard until his retirement in 2005. His mother worked as a Kmart stock clerk until she retired in 1995.
Rubio attended South Miami Senior High School, graduating in 1989. He attended Tarkio College in Missouri for one year on a football scholarship before transferring to Santa Fe Community College and then graduating in 1993 with a bachelor of science from the University of Florida. He continued his studies at the University of Miami where he earned his juris doctor, cum laude, in 1996.
From 2000-2008, Rubio served in the Florida House of Representatives. During this period, he served as Majority Whip, Majority Leader and Speaker of the House, effectively promoting an agenda of lower taxes, better schools, a leaner and more efficient government and free market empowerment. Rubio also helped spearhead Florida’s congressional and legislative redistricting effort. He chaired the House Select Committee on Property Rights, which crafted national model legislation to protect private property rights following the U.S. Supreme Court’s Kelo v. City of New London decision that opened the door for eminent domain abuse.
During the two years prior to assuming the speakership, Rubio traveled around the state hosting “Idearaisers” to solicit Floridians’ input on ways to strengthen Florida. The 100 best ideas were compiled into a book entitled “100 Innovative Ideas for Florida’s Future” which served as the basis for his term. All 100 ideas were passed by the Florida House. Fifty-seven of these ideas ultimately became law, including measures to crack down on gangs and sexual predators, promote energy efficient buildings, appliances and vehicles, and help small businesses obtain affordable health coverage. Former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich hailed the effort as “a work of genius.”
In addition to these ideas, Rubio championed a major overhaul of the Florida tax system that would have eliminated all property taxes on primary residences in favor of a flat consumption tax. The effort garnered national attention, with Grover Norquist, president of the fiscally conservative Americans for Tax Reform, praising Rubio as “the most pro-taxpayer legislative leader in the country.”
During his legislative career, Rubio also promoted efforts to develop a world-class public school curriculum, increase performance-based accountability, enhance school choice and target the socio-economic factors affecting chronic academic underperformance. He is also widely credited for blocking the expansion of gambling in Florida and shepherding the passage of historic energy legislation based on market incentives rather than government-imposed mandates.
Since the end of his tenure as Speaker, Rubio has resumed his law practice as a sole practitioner. He has also served as a visiting professor at Florida International University’s Metropolitan Center, worked as Florida Chairman of GOPAC and as a political analyst for Univision during the 2008 election cycle.
He has also continued his community and civic involvement, serving on the boards of the Latin Builders Association and Alafit International, a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting global literacy. He also remains engaged in the West Miami community where he served as a city commissioner prior to being elected to the state house.
Rubio and his wife, Jeanette Dousdebes Rubio, have been married since 1998. They are the parents of four children: Amanda, Daniella, Anthony, and Dominic. They currently live in the working class city of West Miami, just four blocks from the home his parents moved the family to in 1985. .
Yesterday the people of America spoke and their message was loud and clear. If the politicians in both political parties were listening that message should chill them to the bone. America said we are a nation of people, not parties, and the foundation of America is built on principles, not partisan agendas.
To make their point emphatic they dealt the Republicans near fatal losses in 2006 and 2008, and now have decimated the incredible base Obama thought was a mandate by tossing the Democrats out just two years later.
On the surface it was a Republican landslide of historic proportions. The GOP won 65 House seats from the Democrats and 8 Senate seats. In the Senate the Obama margin of 60-40 has now shrunk to just 50-48 with 2 Independents. Three of the most powerful Democrat chairmen were sent into retirement and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi saw the most losses to a Majority party since the Great Depression of the 1930's.
But that does not even tell half the story. You see in America our government flows from the people through the state governments to the federal government. Of 38 governors races last night the Republicans won an astounding 27 including sweeping victories throughout the Great Lakes, Midwest, South and Southwest and even recapturing some statehouses in New England. Of course this landslide started a year ago when New Jersey and Virginia governors offices went GOP along with Ted Kennedy's Senate seat in Massachusetts.
At the state government level the change may even be greater as Republicans swept into control in state legislatures from Maine to Minnesota including most of the Obama states from Pennsylvania to Montana. It was one of the most memorable shifting in the balance of power the past century.
But it was not just a Republican victory, it was a statement by the people that they want moderation in the agenda along with conservatism in our spending and debt. Both parties failed the people on these counts the last decade.
America is a right tilting nation in the middle. It is neither far right nor far left. Obama moved too far left in a rather selfish attempt to fix his place in the history books rather than fix the nation. It failed badly and his crown as conquering hero has been firmly knocked off his head. Now it is up to him to choose to lead down the middle of the political spectrum or lose in 2012.
Politicians forgot they serve the people. The people sent them a wake up call wrapped in a 100 foot tsunami. There was an old joke, a conservative is a liberal who got hit in the head by reality. Perhaps there is more truth than we thought in that joke.
So now the people spoke. Did the politicians listen? Stay tuned.
One of my biggest media complaints is how modern news reports condense all news into 30 second sound bites when the truth is most news stories deserve much more coverage.
Well tonight NBC News has turned back the clock to the good old days of broadcast journalism when people we trusted gave us the news, people like Huntley Brinkley on NBC.
Save Savannah
They are the only broadcast network going to prime time news coverage from 9-11 eastern with constant news coverage of the elections, and coverage will resume after the local news from 11:30 to 3:30 am.
Brian Williams and the news staff will finally give us the type of balanced news coverage we deserve and NBC should be cheered for restoring journalism values to network coverage. .
If you want to know what the stock market is going to do in reaction to the midterm elections, here is a bit of inside information. The greater the victory by the Republicans the greater the economy and stock market will improve. So if you want to speed up the economic recovery, vote Republican.
In most off year elections the minority party wins the most seats and the stock market always gains more on average after a midterm election than after a presidential election. Obama should know, he got elected and the stock market promptly crashed.
The market has been slowly trending up this year as the Republican victory got nearer. The larger the GOP victory tomorrow, the stronger the market will react for the better.
Part is a result of the anti-business attitude of our young president, part is a result of the social leaning agenda of Obama and the Democrats, part is because of the record setting deficit spending and record increase in the national debt under Obama, and part is the historical pattern of minority success in midterm elections.
Make no mistake, the Republicans are going to win and win big.
According to Brian Gendreau, market strategist for Financial Network, in the period from 1922 to 2006, the average gain of the Dow Jones Industrial Average over the 90 trading days following midterm elections (roughly November until mid-March) was 8.5%, according to a new study he authored.
That's almost 5% higher than the Dow's gains in presidential election years.
During the midterm elections the only time the ruling party gained seats in both the House of Representatives and Senate was in the 2002 elections, and the market fell afterward - making it the only time since 1942 that the Dow has fallen after a midterm election.
In the days before midterms, the market generally tends to perform well, just as it has this year.
"The market starts to go up beforehand and it just doesn't stop," said Gendreau.
While past performance is no indication of future success, consider this: The Standard & Poor's 500 Index has posted gains for every 200-trading day period following mid-term congressional elections since 1942. Stocks surge, on average, by a whopping 18.3% in those 200 days, according to the Leuthold Group, a Minneapolis-based investment-research firm.
The S&P index chalked up its biggest 200-day gain, 30.5%, in 1942, as the tide began to turn in World War II. The smallest gain, 3.9%, came in 1946, as investors worried that the economy would sink into another depression.
Our young and inexperienced president has continued to dominate the television entertainment, talk, comedy and sports shows since he took office where he is in control of the agenda and can get an occasional laugh. In fact, no other president in history has come close to the number of appearances Obama has made on Oprah, the View, Jon Stewart, Letterman, Leno an on and on.
At the same time our kind of telegenic president, who now allows comedians to call him "Dude", has only held two real news conferences the past year. Even George Bush made himself available to the news media far, far more than Obama. Why are the Obama people so dedicated to protecting him from news questions while making it seem as if he is always available?
I suppose if my domestic legislative accomplishments could not be understood, like health care, financial reform and the stimulus, and my foreign accomplishments did not exist, like failures to stop Iran, North Korea, Israel, Afghanistan, Russia or China from doing things we don't like I might not want to face the music either.
As the economy stumbles along, unemployment remains far higher than we were promised when we gave Obama his trillion dollar stimulus, health care costs continue to spiral up, wars get worse and relations keep deteriorating, it is probably better that Obama be kept far away from the news media on the comedy and entertainment shows.
Heaven forbid if the news media, what used to be the watchdogs of the public, ever got to know the truth about what Obama is doing. .
One week before the elections the polls politicians don't want you to see are showing startling results as the campaign draws to a close. These are not the polls of individual races but the ones measuring the sentiment of likely voters. Gallup shows that likely enthusiastic voters leaning Democrat are at 37% while likely voters leaning Republican are at 63%, the highest Republican figure ever recorded in the history of the polls. That means a 26% lead in enthusiasm for those leaning Republican with just one week to go.
More ominous for the Democrats, this is after the President, Vice President and First Lady Michelle Obama have been crisscrossing the nation seeking to generate enthusiasm and raising millions of campaign dollars. Clearly this election has become a referendum on the Obama agenda and the Obama campaign strategy.
The last year there was a Republican landslide was 1994 when the GOP took control of both the House and Senate and the GOP enthusiasm advantage was only 9% compared to 26% this year. With the discontent of Independents over Obama and his Democrats rising consistently, Independents favor the GOP over Democrats by over 14%.
A Gallup poll released Friday found that only 23 percent of Independent voters agree that “most members of Congress deserve reelection.” The similar figure for Republican voters is 21 percent, according to Gallup, while 59 percent of Democrats say most US representatives should be returned to office. The combined results of all three groups means only 33 percent of voters overall think incumbents deserve to win. That’s the lowest such percentage prior to a midterm election that Gallup has found in the past 16 years.
At the same time if Republicans win overwhelmingly they sill have a lot of work to do to convince the public they will do what is best for the nation as just 43% of the people believe either party can lead effectively. The GOP will have two years to prove they can best meet the public needs.
.jpg)
.jpg)
