Saturday, September 25, 2010

4th District Update - Barney Frank (D-MA) - Fails to Show for Debate With Republican Opponent Sean Bielat

My Fox Boston - You Tube Video says it All. Barney Frank is "too busy" to debate his Republican Challenger, Sean Bielat - but not too busy to have Bill Clinton come to stump for him (tomorrow,September 26th, at 2pm at the Taunton High School). From the AP "Rep. Frank denies Clinton stop indicates weakness": Frank will not debate his opponent, challenges the early Poll numbers as inaccurate, and wants 4th district voters to believe he's "too busy" to debate, but will appear at a rally with Bill Clinton at his side.

From the video (My Fox Boston) below - constituents ask: Why he did not show up! Although the national media and the Beltway consider the 4th District "Safe Democrat", they also called the "People's Seat" "Safe Democrat up until a week prior to the actual vote.

This is high political theater!

Hamden Second District East Media Goes to Bat for Congressman Richard Neal (D-MA) Up for Relection 2010

A recent article on MassLive.com (The Springfield Republican’s website) posted under the MyWideWorld – sports section, reads less like any actual news article or op-ed and more like an advertorial (magazine advertisement made to look like an article purposefully) for incumbent Democrat Congressional Representative Richard Neal.

Based upon the seventeen comments received since the article went “live” on Friday morning, sports enthusiasts apparently aren’t buying what the Republican’s sports section is selling. The article title alone says it all: “Message from Congressman Richard Neal: Help is just a phone call away” – and the following content reads like a campaign piece – with the inclusion of the promise that Neal will be back for another term. In addition, the opposition, one Republican Tom Wesley, stands no chance of beating Richard Neal.

That said Congressman Neal is placing “advertising” on You Tube! The ads depict “ordinary citizens” talking about how much Neal has done for them personally.

Seriously - YouTube.

Seriously - Real Constituents?

The Congressman who is most likely to “reach out and touch his constituents" every two years, prior to an election with a mailer touting how much he’s done for them, generally runs unopposed. The mailers, which generally speak about his "accomplishments" may not have been enough: He may have to try a little harder this year: The last paragraph of the article gives the guy (Tom Wesley) who doesn’t’ have a chance against this Democrat Incumbent – a mention:


We've seen the incumbents fall, we've witnessed the political upsets. Tom Wesley may not have the charm and good looks of a Scott Brown, but he's gotten the attention of the Neal campaign.


Apparently, Tom Wesley, who has a remarkable grassroots campaign, has Richard Neal worried. How worried - enough to put one ad on YouTube, where views on the ad (also shown below) have reached 252 (253 including this blog) to date.

Conversely, Tom Wesley’s who has several You Tube offerings - has one Health Care Video Ad has which has received 317 views. (Also Shown Below).

Should these particular You Tube ads which are reaching a minuscule audience in the grand scheme of things (web and the Hampden 2nd district), were to go district wide (cable) one can bet the house the Wesley ad would resonate with voters, while Neal’s ad would go flat.

The voters of the Hampden 2nd, both east and west, are familiar enough with their Congressman and how he votes. For the past several decades, many a vote has gone to Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck or a Warner Brothers Character, due to the fact that there was no other choice. Now, faced with a choice, Neal and his friends over at the Springfield Republican are doing their best to insure that Neal remains the status quo.

Fortunately for the Hampden 2nd district, given a choice may not be in Neal’s best interest. So, who is Neal reaching?
Neal is reaching is base, or his staff, and those reliable Democrats, who make up approximately 30% of the voting bloc in the Hampden Second. Who he’s not reaching is the rest of the block.

Up until last month, Neal was anticipating support in the form of one Bill Clinton who was coming to stump for Neal – the fact that Neal needed a visit from Clinton is telling – Neal has more in the “bank” than most Congressmen on Capitol Hill, so much so that he has been asked by party leadership to spread the wealth.

Did Clinton suddenly decide that Neal was not in trouble? Or was Barney Frank, over in the 4th District in more trouble than Neal? Also, consider the fact that Barney Frank did not give his super delegate vote at the Convection to Obama, and Neal did, (instead of the Former Presidents wife, Hillary Clinton) and one gets the picture.

It is not inconceivable that Clinton may yet be called upon to make an appearance; internal polls are still lackluster, at best for the incumbent (which prompted the Clinton visit in the first place).

Here are a few reasons why The Republican, although trying its best, may fall short: (Note the results as well as any mention of the primary results vis a vis a Republican Challenger by the Republican, were placed last on any article, almost as an “afterthought”. In addition, a debate played on the NBC Local affiliate, WWLP between the two Republican challengers for Neal’s seat, was shown at 2:00 pm, with video on the WWLP website. That said, there was no subsequent mention of a debate on the evening and or late night editions of the news broadcast that same day.)

As this is “Western Massachusetts”, we’ll call it “circling the wagons around Neal”, but will it work?

The Tea Party, Conservatives, Independents and Democrats; and odd mix to be sure, but all with one common interest – removing the incumbent from office.

Is Tom Wesley the man to send to Congress to Replace Richard Neal? As far as many of Neal’s constituents are concerned if Wesley is listed in the phone book, that’s good enough for them. However, having recently had the opportunity to meet Mr. Wesley and observe him speaking to possible constituents, one gets the impression that yes; indeed, Mr. Wesley has the right qualifications to impress a potential voter, even if that potential voter happens to be a registered Democrat.

Apparently, Tom Wesley is reaching those who don’t buy the advertorials, or for that matter, read either the web or print version of the Republican. According to the latest Circulation Audit the Springfield Republican has a reach of approximately 67,181 residents on Monday through Friday The Worcester Telegram and Gazette has a slightly higher circulation, reaching an average of 70,433 Monday- Friday (The Hampden 2nd District touches on Worcester, which is the 3rd Congressional District) (Recall Richard Neal and McGovern (D-MA), held a co-town hall on health care in August of 2009).

How many registered voters are these newspapers reaching? The district includes the counties of Hampden, Hampshire, Norfolk and Worcester, with Hampden County: Agawam, Brimfield, Chicopee, East Longmeadow, Hampden, Holland, Longmeadow, Ludlow, Monson, Palmer, Springfield, Wales, and Wilbraham. Hampshire County: Hadley, Northampton, South Hadley. Norfolk County: Bellingham, Worcester County: Blackstone, Brookfield, Charlton, Douglas, Dudley, East Brookfield, Grafton, Hopedale, Leicester, Mendon, Milford, Millbury, Millville, North Brookfield, Northbridge, Oxford, Southbridge, Spencer, Sturbridge, Sutton, Upton, Uxbridge, Warren, Webster.

Enrollment by Party in the aforementioned Counties (conceding that several of these counties are split by either than MA 1st or MA 3rd district) Based on the 2008 election returns:

Hampden County: 289,000 registered voters: 39% Democrat, 13% Republican, 46% unenrolled

Worcester County: 510,000 registered voters: 30% Democrat, 13% Republican, 55% unenrolleds
Hampshire County: 103,000 registered voters: 38% Democrat, 9% Republican, 51% unenrolled
Norfolk County: Town of Bellingham

The outcome may appear obvious to the Springfield Republican, (or not), that said, Massachusetts “Independent Voters” will decide the Hampden 2nd District Congressional Race. Those who identify themselves as “Independent” are currently nationwide, breaking away from the President, his policies, and those incumbents who were invested in primaries (either Republican or Democrat) – the trend is expected to carry through to the mid-term.

As of now, from this point of view, and the preceding analysis, Mr. Tom Wesley has an even chance of besting Congressman Neal. The more the local press runs articles under sports, lifestyle, and anywhere they feel they may be able to give their obviously preferred candidate a boost, it becomes apparent to the less than 30% of the registered voters they may be reaching in Hampden County alone, that Wesley is worth watching – 30% or the equivalency of talking to the choir.


Neal’s You Tube Advertisement


Tom Wesley’s You Tube "Advertisement"

Friday, September 24, 2010

Massachusetts Hampden 2nd District 2010 Election Update - Richard Neal (D-MA) Agrees to 1 of 5 Requested Debates With Opponent Tom Wesley (R)


Richard Neal (D) with Obama, Neal is up for Relection this November - photo Life Magazine

WGBY TV, Springfield MA is said to be hosting one debate between incumbent Democrat Congressman Richard Neal and his Republican challenger, Tom Wesley, on October 15th, at 7:30 PM. Neal, who is up for re-election this November, has run unopposed for the majority of his “career”, which began in 1988. Neal last faced opposition 12 years ago. Prior to being the Hampden 2nd Congressional Representative, Neal was the Mayor of Springfield, MA; in Congress he sits on the House Ways and Means Committee, which essentially is in charge of raising money for the Federal government, in other words, the arm of the Congress that is in charge of taxes. The former chair of the Committee was New York Democrat Charles Rangel, who left the Committee when charged with ethics violations. The current acting Chair is Sander Levin (D-MI). Richard Neal is said to be actively seeking the Chair of this Committee, should the Democrats retain control of Congress, in 2010.


Tom Wesley 2010 Republican Challenger to Richard Neal(D-MA),photo CNN

A recent press release from the Wesley Campaign noted that Congressman Neal had been asked to take part in five “town-hall” style debates. Mr. Wesley, a former veteran (profiled here on CNN) has an extensive background in international business, having worked for both Fortune 500 companies as well as owning his own businesses. Mr. Wesley had this to say on the Town Hall Style Debate:

“I can’t think of a better forum than a town hall debate. Not only will the voters hear from the candidates, but they will have the opportunity to engage in a conversation with each as well.”


To date, Congressman Neal has agreed to the one debate on WGBY Public Television. The last town-hall style meeting to which Rep. Neal agreed was a co-meeting with third district’s Representative, James McGovern on the proposed Health Care Legislation. According to the article in the Telegram Gazette, both Neal and McGovern, who supported the Obama’s Health Care Plan, we’re met with “boos” from the audience. During August of 2009, this was the only Town Hall held by Neal and there were no meetings offered in other areas of the district.

The experience of meeting with angry constituents may be why Congressmen Neal is shy about Town Hall Style debates. Although unlikely, it would be a boon to his constituents if he were to agree to at least two of these types of debates, one in the Western and one in the Eastern Part of the district. As Mr. Wesley points out, it gives the constituents a chance to interact with their Representative and with the opposition candidate. Choosing a representative in Congress should, unlike some American’s now believe, involve more than picking a name from a phonebook. As the time is short between the primary and the election (approximately six weeks in Massachusetts), debates, televised and or town-hall style, allow the citizen to make an informed decision on which candidate they feel best represents the district.

The Hampden 2nd District of Massachusetts includes the cities of Springfield, Northampton and Chicopee in Western Massachusetts and runs to the Southern Suburbs of Worcester in Central Massachusetts.

Candidate websites:

Richard Neal: Richard Neal.org

Or Neal for Congress

Tom Wesley Tom Wesley .com

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Obama Speech Interrupted by Protestors! – E Tu Manhattan? Gets Facts Wrong on AIDS Funding. Analysis.


George W. Bush, Miss me Yet Image: Centrist Blog

FromPolitico: Obama has been heckled in Manhattan by protesters angry over AIDS Funding and “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”. His response to criticism has become rather pat: The Republican’s, if elected, will go back to Bush policy. If that were true, than those protesting might be better off. George W. Bush, the president the left loves to hate, along with a Republican Congress did more for AIDS relief than Mr. Obama.

From the Clarion Ledger:

"Begun in 2003 by former Republican President George W. Bush, the U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief or PEPFAR was hailed as the largest effort by any nation to combat a single disease.

As a candidate in 2008, then-Sen. Barack Obama pledged to add $1 billion annually to the PEPFAR fund that Bush and Congress created to fight AIDS in Africa and other developing nations.
But as president, world health advocates point out that Obama proposed only a $366 million increase for the coming fiscal year - which comes on top of another broken promise from last year. In 2009, Obama proposed spending only $165 million for PEPFAR."


What Obama fails to realize, for whatever reason, is that people’s memories are not that short. The left may have demonized George W. Bush, who many on the right had described as more than moderate, and the Congress in concert with Mr. Bush in his first term, lost the base due to an increase in entitlement programs and “pork”.
When George W. Bush wanted to work on Social Security – he was met with a hailstorm of criticism for suggesting that he had a way to strengthen the program – basically giving those participating in the program (anyone who works) the option, and merely an option, of using the same retirement program that the Congress and federal employees enjoy. That notion sent the press and the Democrats who were in Congress round the proverbial bend – yet, today the Republican’s are dubbed the “party of no”, where the Democrats, only a few short years ago, were, in effect, guilty of hampering improvements to social security. The premise of the “just say no” by Democrats to privatizing social security benefits was simple: The masses could not handle it, and would bankrupt themselves. Seriously, the largest employer today (the Federal Government), uses that program, which has safeguards in place for retirees – meanwhile, Social Security is going broke as it is being used for entitlement programs left and right that have zip to do with retirement.

How bad is it, when the man the press and the left loved to hate, and insisted would go down as the “worst President in History”, is the beneficiary of being “missed” by the populace. From Billboards, to tee-shirts to polls, Bush and his band of maligned Republicans did more for the economy (recovery after September 11th attacks on New York and Washington DC), in actual jobs created, did more in necessary entitlement programs for U.S. And global citizens (Prescription drug benefits for senior citizens and AIDS funding), and incidentally, kept the nation safe from terrorist attacks.

When did Bush become stalled, so to speak, and unable to move any improvements forward? When, in 2006, the Congress changed political party hands and ended up being controlled by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. It is not that Bush’s policy decisions were a hit with Conservatives (recall the Mexican Dollar with George Bush’s photo neatly photo shopped onto the currency); on the contrary, many viewed the former President as too liberal. Which is somewhat true, Bush was a moderate, who put country and humanity first.
Whereas, Obama appears to put Party and Ideology before the needs of the American’ people and is unable and unwilling to compromise, and most importantly, he is unable to take direct criticism without going into campaign mode and pointing the finger elsewhere – of course, at the Republicans. So much for bringing unity to the Government – one has to own one’s mistakes, at least once in a blue moon.

Wednesday, September 22, 2010

Barney Frank (D-MA), Up for Re-Election 2010, Opponent Sean Bielat (R) Releases Internal Poll – Frank Below 50% - Bielat Within 10


Barney Frank Under 50! - Image The Daily Bail


Breaking: Sean Bielat, the Republican opponent seeking the Massachusetts 4th District Congressional Seat currently held by Democrat Barney Frank, released internal poll results today. The poll, conducted by On Message, Inc. shows Frank with a 48% approval rating, compared to Sean Bielat at 38%. The poll, taken immediately after the September 14th primaries, indicates Frank is in deep trouble in the 4th District. Additionally, undecided’s were at 13%, which, if history repeats itself (as it is prone to do) Bielat is in better shape with more time at this point, than Scott Brown in his quest for the Peoples Senate Seat back in December of 2009. A release by the Bielat campaignindicated the poll sample of 400 likely voters had a margin of error of plus or minus 4.9 %.

Barney Frank’s campaign may have had the same or possibly worse results with their internal polling data - Former President, Bill Clinton is on his way to Massachusetts to stump for Barney in a rally to take place at Taunton High School, this week. ( according to an AC report for Yahoo News (listed under the travel section! There is a counter-rally planned.

To learn more about Sean Bielat visit Sean Bielat.org Should Rasmussen care to jump in anytime within the next two weeks, one should find that the numbers should be within the margin of error (given what took place with polling in the January 19th, special election).

Progressive Strategy – Demean Women in Politics to Distract from the Issues

One understands that politics are dirty, and that when one enters the political arena, be it a male or a female, they are subjecting themselves and often their family, to the proverbial microscope of the press. No matter how frivolous a charge or alleged “scandal” might be, and no matter the position sought, a “leak” of the most ridiculous sorts, suddenly becomes “national news”. That said, the disparity between the opposition attacks against women, regardless of party, is fairly prominent, and especially true this past week as the nation has less than 42 days to determine the shape of the 112th Congress, and incidentally immediately following, the candidates for the Presidential primaries for 2012.

One which stands out more than most is the embattled “Tea Party” Candidate Christine O’Donnell, of Delaware. O’Donnell: If one Googles' O’Donnell is the search engines News feature, they will find thousands of articles regarding a videotape of Ms. O’Donnell as a teen, making a silly comment about being involved with Wicca (witchcraft). Of course, Mr. Maher, the HBO talk show host, who if one reviews his past videos will find remarks made by the host that would elevate Ms. O’Donnell sainthood.

For example the video below shows a younger Maher, comparing dogs to “retarded children”. This is the same man who is taken seriously when dismissing a Senate candidate for a comment made while a teen. That said, the media jumped on this nonsense and moved it to the spotlight, which certainly distracts from the issues at hand that affect voters in Delaware. Ms. O’Donnell’s opponent on the other hand, is an avowed Marxist and believes in increasing the size of the U.S. government Of course, nothing to concern Delaware voters about Mr. Coons, also dubbed Harry Reid’s Pet must, according to press logic, be the better candidate.



Aside from the ridiculous, serious charges have been leveled against Ms. O’Donnell, specifically regarding a lean placed upon her by the IRS, which is running in an ad throughout Delaware, what the ad fails to mention (given that it is a DNC ad), Ms. O’Donnell received an apology from the IRS for their mistake. In fact, for every spurious accusations against the woman, she has asked and answered with full documentation (the actual documents) on her website here at Chrstine2010.com. Meanwhile, nothing is being asked and answered by either candidate about issues. But, as a woman, the “witch” tag is sticking and the word “teen” has made its d├ębut.

Although one could argue it is partisan politics (dirty, agreed), it is an attack on O’Donnell personally and as a woman. (Bill Maher remarks in his video with a then high school age O’Donnell “what’s with the 90’s hair?”.

Speaking of hairstyles: Hillary Clinton, the woman who should have been President (opinion with a basis in fact (i.e. popular vote in primary dismissed by super-delegates in favor of the brilliant Obama who has failed to show his brilliance) is to this day, under the fashion microscope, this time, her faux pax is a hairstyle. How silly. Yet, in some ways, not at all, as it is the beginning of firing “salvos” should the former New York Senator decide to run against this particular sitting president as rumors suggest. This article by the New York Daily News, goes into detail on Clinton’s “new hairdo” for a UN meeting. Apparently, Clinton had worn a banana clip of sorts, looking as if she had more to worry about, and chose a “banana clip” to get the hair up and away from her face. Herein lies the crux – perhaps Ms. Clinton’s hairstyle is big news to those who hit the salon on a daily basis, but for those of us who work for a living, it looks familiar, and comfortable, and lastly “normal”. The end result, in trying to dismiss Clinton via hair, or what she wore on a particular day, etc., is that she becomes more human to the rest of nation that might find themselves in that same pantsuit situation.

One can, however, bet the house that should John Kerry assume the role as Secretary of State, (rumored to be replacing Clinton as she seeks a way out), then the press will undoubtedly not fixate on the type of tie he wore on a particular day, or the cut of a suit.

Finally, Sarah Palin, who has been criticized on wardrobe, and more, continues to be a target, as she has taken a prominent place in politics and is possibly one of the 2012 candidates for President. One can anticipate the attacks on Palin to be "ramped u a bit" and, should Clinton join her from the opposite side of the aisle, attacks on her as well, not on the issues but on what both women wore, their makeup, their hairstyles, ad nauseum.

This is nothing new in the political arena, when women attempt to cross over into a predominately male “club”. The first woman to break the political glass ceiling (Vice President, not President), Geraldine Ferraro, was also treated with the same hair brush, discussions regarding her were national news.

That was in 1984. A mere 26 years ago, which is current in the scheme of women in politics.

Two stunning Women and politics facts:
1920 - Given the right to vote – last “group” to be given that right.
Ongoing - Categorized as a minority (seriously women and minorities)

Observations:

Are considered to have broken the glass ceiling by merely being a, candidate

Progressives for all their “solidarity” are as sexist as a men’s only club.

However, there are more women candidates for state and federal offices in 2010 than in previous years, specifically in the GOP. Philosophically, (Feminism) and legally (EEO) regardless of party or politics, women should be treated no differently than their male counterparts when applying for the same position, be it in the private sector or the public sector. It is far past time, for there to be two qualified candidates for the nations highest office, and should those candidates be women , then all the better. As the press would be forced to speak on issues, rather than what dress one wore, or what hairstyle the other chose for a particular meeting.

Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Sarah Palin Mainstreams in 2012 Potential run should it be against Obama

A Rasmussen Reports Survey released yesterdayindicated that more American’s feel Sarah Palin’s views are closer to their own than those of President Obama. This by a wide margin of 52% (Palin) to 40% (Obama), which indicates that in a potential 2012 presidential competition, Palin is being seen by most voters (specifically the Unenrolled) more self-identified than Barak Obama.

The liberal UK newspaper The Independent outlined the scenario where Palin would become Madam President, with the conclusion: “It could happen”.

One thing one reading the UK and other Euro newspapers quickly understands is that they appear to be a step ahead on reporting the obvious, while the U.S. papers decline to print similar stories (be it pro-Palin or anti-Obama). As Ms. Palin is often compared to former Prime Minister Maggie Thatcher, it is probable that the UK has more insight into hiring a strong woman (conservative) as Prime Minister.

It is a matter of confidence, and power, and currently, the former Governor of Alaska, wields power over the Republicans Party, one the one hand endorsing the candidates she chooses to endorse, while teh RNC is busy sending out fundraising mailers under Palin’s name. The aforementioned, is an achievement that few women have reached in American Politics (none in recent memory) – she is also a strong supporter of the Tea Party Movement, where the demographics are mainly women, who vote as independents.

Although speculation on 2012 is not advisable prior to a mid-term (although immediately following) – no one, at this point, knows if Palin will, indeed, decide to run. However, it would set up the potential match-up of historic proportions. Should Obama be bested in a primary by Hillary Clinton, the historical first would be a choice of two strong women for President. Of course, on the part of any woman, that may be considered wishful thinking, yet, certain events, set in motion, may make such a match up probable in 2012.

Obama and Clinton Differ On the Tea Party – Too Little, Too Late to Salvage 2010 Mid-Terms – Is Clinton Laying Groundwork for 2012?


Bill Cliton On the Stump for Democrats - Image Sun Sentinal

There’s been a dearth of talk show appearances for former President, Bill Clinton this past week, from the Sunday morning news shows to an appearance last night on Fox News with Greta Van Susteren – the main topic – The Tea Party movement. Clinton, according to Politico, is suggesting that politicians listen to the Tea Party, while at the same time, suggesting they are “funded” by right wing extremists. The same theme was reiterated last night in an appearance on Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren, with the exception that in this particular interview, Clinton referred to the polls, and incidentally appeared exhausted (see video here). Clinton, who has been on the campaign trail with Democrat candidates (incumbents) as an alternative to President Obama (even in Massachusetts, where he’s been on the stump for for Stephen Lynch (D-MA), during a primary fight with a Progressive Democrat and will be appearing in Tuanton at the High School to support an endangered Barney Frank against Republican challenger, Sean Bielat at 2 pm on March 26th.)looks exhausted as it appears to be an uphill battle.

Bill Clinton, who is generally popular as a moderate Democrat, especially among the all important independent voter, has been looking at the polls – the Tea Party appears to have the support of a majority of voters, and some members are Democrats or independents, that would vote for a Democrat. It’s a fine line to walk, supporting candidates who are the nemesis of the Tea Party movement, such as Rep. Barney Frank, while trying to garner Tea Party support for the Democrats. He is potentially laying groundwork for a 2012 run at the White House by Hillary Clinton, who has been rumored to be considering mounting a challenge against sitting President Barack Obama. Clinton is no dummy; he’s survived impeachment with high approval ratings, and has generally followed polls in order to understand what it is that voters want from an elected official.

It must be taxing to attempt to stump for a Political Party one loves and believes in, while the Party “leader”, in this case President Obama, is doing just the opposite. Clinton is caught in the twilight zone of Progressive dogma and incompetence, with Obama challenging the “Tea Party” to come up with a plan, if they are not happy with the way he and his administration (Congress included) have run the government. (NY Daily News). Obama, either apparently understands that, contrary to many of the press who characterize the Tea Party as a “philosophical movement”, it is a fledgling Political party, one which may marginalize the Democrats, rather than the Republican’s should it continue to gain mainstream prominence - or he’s moronically hitting back at the core electorate he needs – independent voters and women, the majority of which, make up the movement.

At this point in the game however, Democrats are still desperately trying to either marginalize the Tea Party as “fringe” or tie them to the GOP (and considering Tea Party candidates have, in the same way as Progressives candidate to the Democrats, run as Republican’s and have been extremely successful) with both tactics being rather self-defeating.

In reviewing polls at Real Clear Politics.com, the numbers are not good particularly good for the Democrats. The methodology employed by Real Clear Politics in assessing a particular race, is to include all polls taken, regardless of accuracy, which may move the numbers into a “tie” where none exists. In addition, congressional districts across the nation which are competitive are not being polled – the prime example is the MA 4th District where Sean Bielat (R) is challenging Barney Frank (D-MA) who is, for perhaps the first time, actively campaigning in the district. Therefore, there may be more Republican gains than anticipated at Real Clear Politics.

There is a reason why Bill Clinton is going to Taunton to stump for Barney – where the former President will be greeted with respect from what is anticipated to be a well-attended rally the troop’s event, compete with an Anti-Barney Protest that may rival the attendance inside the school. (The rally, announced by the Bielat campaign on Facebook, is working to ensure that protesters are covered by all applicable laws and have the correct permits.) Given that one has to wonder just how many voters vested in the 4th district are planning on attending. That may have added an extra bit of “angst” to the already overburdened Clinton (unless of course, he plans on skipping out on Barney to hand out Hillary Clinton 2010 bumper stickers to those Independents and Democrats who will be at the counter-Barney rally.)

Of the two men, one a sitting President and the other a former two-term President, who managed to work with a Congress in total political opposition, the one to watch in the coming weeks will be Bill Clinton as he attempts to undo what Obama does naturally, offend potential mainstream voters. Should Clinton manage to at least salvage some shred of dignity on a road paved with Congressional misery, it will be a coup. One has to understand that Clinton coming to rally for Frank, instead of Obama is a huge signal that Obama has lost even Massachusetts, and sends clear signals to those who would have rather seen a Clinton in the White House, that it may still be a possibility.

Monday, September 20, 2010

Obama Administration – Desperation Plan – Attack the Tea Party – Bill Clinton Takes a Different Tactic – Hillary, Palin and the Tea Party - Analysis

The New York Timesran an article yesterday here outlining the administration’s plans to air a national television campaign tying the Tea Party movement to the GOP, noting that the source was, as always, anonymous, and that the ad would air only on “cable”. Meanwhile, smart as a fox, and possibly laying the groundwork for his wife’s 2012 run at the White House, former president Bill Clinton believes that the “Tea Party is misplacing the blame” (NY Daily News). In a series of Sunday talk show appearances, Clinton argued that the Tea Party candidates have the right idea in that the public is tired of big government, but that it is “bankrolled” by “people” who would harm the government by concentrating power in the private sector. Seriously, on the one hand, Clinton, one of the few moderates left in the Democrat party, is giving credit to the candidates that either have Tea Party support, or are Tea Party originals, while warning of disaster if the government is reduced.

Both the White House, and a variety of cheerleaders from press, are missing one critical point – the Tea Party “movement” is not about the GOP – it is about the government period and primarily about fiscal conservatism, job creation and individual liberty. The GOP just happens to have some of the qualities Tea Party members are seeking – but it appears to be temporary.

In addition, examine who make up members of the Tea Party, some of them are far right, some of them are also Democrats, most of them are, more to the point, “unenrolleds” or “independent” status voters. Those voters who have never found either party overly appealing, or meeting part or any of their political ideology have finally found a “Party” they like. This is regardless of how many times a member of the Democrat Party or the Press cries “right-wing extremist” (note – Clinton, in his interviews, did not use that particular phrase). Interestingly, the New York Daily used the Clinton interview to segue into a criticism of Tea Party candidate Christine O’Donnell – who they are desperately tying to Sarah Palin, on the one hand, while leaving out the fact that she upset a Republican Incumbent on the other.

Clinton, one can observe, never went that route, leaving Palin out of it completely, although touching on O’Donnell – as a Tea Party Candidate, having to spell out what had happened as far as several “bombshells” dropped by the press in recent weeks against her, personally.

Bill Maher, a comedian turned “quasi news commentator” on Cable’s HBO network, “outed” O’Donnell recently for “Dabbling in Witchcraft” – in addition, she’s had a slew of financial difficulties and discrepancies in her bio. The dabbling in Witchcraft nonsense is exactly that, as the 41 year old O’Donnell was in high school at the time. In other words, Tea Party candidates who have had financial difficulties, and may have made some dubious choices in high school, are human.

However, Congressmen and women, who have made dubious choices with other people’s money (taxpayers), and happen to be Democrats, get a pass. Gone are the front page articles on Charles Rangel’s (D-NY), with the exception of his recent win in New York’s primary – one in which, on election day voting machines either malfunctioned or did not work (NYTimes). Rangel is up on a host of charges, likewise, Maxine Waters (D-CA) who funneled tarp funds to a failing bank which just happened to have her husband on the Board. Chris Dodd, (D-CT) decided to get out of the kitchen and retire before the financial disaster came home to roots, and Barney Frank (See Maxine) was in the ”middle” of the Water’s bank scam on the Taxpayer. It is the aforementioned that the "Tea Party Members" get.

However, to the majority of the press and the administration, The Tea Party is “extreme” and in aligning with the GOP, one should vote those Democrats back into office or suffer the consequence. Those consequences being the GOP would now include members of a fledgling Third Party (see analysis here Wall Street Journal)that would not bend on issues of taxpayers monies (the crux of the issue) being spent with abandon (a basic GOP tenant, which in that Political Party’s misplaced need to become more “appealing” to Democrats – acted just like them – see out of control spending in Congress held by GOP in the 2nd term under G.W. Bush.)

The problem, overall, is that those that live in Washington D.C. (and pressrooms across the nation) don’t’ get it. One has to wonder however, if the GOP’s Karl Rove did, especially when he went after Christine O’Donnell for besting an incumbent Republican. The GOP had a stalwart tax and spend semi-reliable Republican in
Mike Castle and Karl Rove, knew that Castle was not ousted by a fellow Republican, rather a member of a Third Party running on the GOP ticket. One that, had not been “fully vetted’ by the “Tea Party” – you can’t blame Karl, who has to understand that the GOP is being used as a spring board for candidates that would be forced to run as a third party candidate. This is similar to the way that “Socialist Progressives” infiltrated the Democrat Party by running as – Democrats.

Karl need not worry overmuch – The Democrats are in panic mode, Clinton understands this, and also understands the need to be “kind” to those Tea Party Candidates, even though they are running as Republicans’ because, he understands they are not “right wing extremists” at all, rather they are American Citizens from all parties, all races, and all ethnic backgrounds who are taxpayers’ sick of being fleeced.

It’s a win for the Republican’s because, at the moment, they are identifying themselves with the GOP – and it’s a loss for the Democrats because they are not specifically the GOP, and apparently, only the members know that – those members reading the press and having voted for one Barack Obama.

Obama on the other hand if he does recognize the strategy and being a Progressive, is, in all likelihood, a bit perturbed as the independents that propelled him into the White House, have now formed a Party to remove him.

What of Sarah Palin? Palin is being tied by now by more than virtue of endorsement to Christine O’Donnell, which the press is trying to take advantage. The Altlantic article written by one Andrew Sullivan who apparently sees a correlation between the teenage O’Donnell’s “witchcraft” date (Bill Maher), and Palin’s attendance at a church where the pastor used the word “witchcraft” in a service in which Palin participated. Obviously, not familiar with biblical text, nor teenagers, and believing that the rest of the nation is likewise ignorant, he pens a rather ridiculous correlation between the two, with the conclusion that neither woman is fit for office.

The problem those press and politicians – (Obama and like-minded Progressives) (with the exception of one Bill Clinton and one Karl Rove, that actually may “get it”) that demonize both the Tea Party, Palin and of course, O’Donnell is that: One, the Tea Party is a separate movement and - Two, O’Donnell is her own person, regardless of Palin’s endorsement and made mistakes in her youth, mistakes and hard times, being something that happens to every single American at some point in their life.

Finally, Palin is a force to be reckoned with, her endorsements are not straight Tea Party, nor straight GOP, she sees something in these candidates that for, whatever reason, makes them better than the alternative. Palin, who came out of the GOP convention and immediately overshadowed Obama, both in the press (who quickly went to work “fixing that Progressive faux pax”), and in attendance at rally’s nationwide, is seen as one of the GOP’s front runners for 2012.

That is with good reason, as one has to examine the possible GOP 2012 candidates(at the moment – Mitt Romney failed to capture the south and the mid-west, Mike Huckabee, may be able to pull it off, although he will be characterized-wrongly as a “religious nut”, Newt Gingrich, always mentioned, Rick Santorum (former Senator – PA - makes Palin look liberal) – none of the aforementioned, let alone Palin have declared) - Palin may be the only one that can actually carry the states necessary to win the nomination.

One scenario which the press, in its blind ambition for the Progressive movement, sees as a victory for Obama, while, Bill Clinton, on the other hand, looks at Sarah Palin as the woman Hillary Clinton must beat in 2012 in order to win the White House for the Democrats.

Therefore, let the White House air those anti-Tea Party, GOP advertisements and they might as well throw Sarah Palin in the mix – unless it is run only on MSNBC, then the probability that this tactic will indeed have an effect on a base is certain – the problem for the administration is – it will be the wrong “base”.

Sunday, September 19, 2010

MA 2010 Governors Race: Deval Patrick Tea Party Motivated by “Hate”, Charlie Baker(R) Ties Patrick (D) in Latest Polling, Cahill (I) an Afterthought


Deval Patrick(D) and Charlie Baker (R) Statistical Tie


A Rasmussen Poll on the Massachusetts Governor's race released on Friday, gives the embattled Democrat (and Obama-Axelrod Field Test) a 3 point lead over Republican Candidate Charlie Baker. The poll is well within the margin of error (45 to 42 with a 4.5 % margin), which is a statistical tie. Included in the poll is the third candidate, Democrat turned conveniently independent Tim Cahill, who was part of the Patrick administration.

As earlier predicted, Independent candidates normally receive under 6% of the vote in Massachusetts which can make for many a close race. That said, Cahill’s had some problems paying taxes, which appears to be a resounding theme this year among candidates – following in the footsteps of “Tim Tax-Evading” Geithner who was confirmed by the Democrat controlled Congress, despite having made some “errors” using Turbo Tax. That apparently has left the door open for all candidates regardless of party. Although, Cahill may have stood a better chance had he done a 360 and changed political parties – as in run as a Republican. Historically third party candidates don’t do well in the Bay State.

Now that Mr. Cahill is quickly becoming an afterthought – The Baker Campaign has the opportunity to move those poll numbers to Scott Brown/Coakley levels or possibly beyond – given the governors general approval ranking, which has mysteriously risen in the past three months of furious campaigning (by the state media) up to, according to Rasmussen’s poll, 49%!

That said there is discontent in the Bay State over higher taxes (implanted by Patrick and company in July of 2009), and interestingly enough, his push to fund college education for illegal aliens. Baker is scoring higher in the “viewed favorably” section of Rasmussen poll, and name recognition, across the Bay State has not reached full potential. Therein lays the rub, the more the voters get to see Charlie Baker, the more they like him.

In a recent on air gubernatorial debate, Govern Deval Patrick discussed the Tea Party – (audio embedded below) and how members are “fueled by hate” (which is the party line in places such as Cambridge, and Amherst), however, a recent Friday gathering of Tea Party Activists, shown in poor quality photos below (given the fact that this blog has no talent in regards to photography), depicts individuals expressing their freedom, although the photo’s are not representative of the entire group (as it coverage both sides of a major rotary, the signs held and visible were Patriotic not hateful – which is the norm, unless one is an incumbent Republican who is running against a Tea Party backed candidate or any Democrat. Therefore, with the dogma in place, and the race tightening, one can see the following taking place within the next three weeks: Baker (R) leading Patrick (D) by 5 points, with Cahill, a blip on the radar, nothing more and nothing less.


Audio of Deval Patrick Tea Party Hate Rhetoric



Tea Party Rally, Signs: American Flags, Don't Tread on Me, a few signs referencing Taxes and Tea.... (Chicopee, is in Richard Neal's (D-MA2) District)


Hundreds line both sides of Rt. 33 in Chicopee, MA in Tea Party Rally

Amazon Picks

Massachusetts Conservative Feminist - Degrees of Moderation and Sanity Headline Animator

FEEDJIT Live Traffic Map

Contact Me:

Your Name
Your Email Address
Subject
Message