MSNBC – Run Elizabeth Warren, Run! On her very Popular Policies

Krystal Ballover at MSNBC lays out the case for why she feels Elizabeth Warren, brand new Senator from Massachusetts, should run for the Presidency on the Progressive Democrat ticket:

This view is puzzling because Warren and her policies are quite popular.

For starters, she is a strong backer of lifting the minimum wage which is massively popular across the ideological spectrum.

And Warren’s supposedly radical idea that we should expand Social Security by more accurately calculating the cost of living is also very popular. The National Academy of Social Insurance found that 7 in 10 Americans preferred expanding Social Security and paying for it by lifting the income cap to our current system.

But Warren has really made her name by fearlessly challenging banks and trying to reign in their predatory practices. Here again, she’s got the public’s backing with 68% of Americans believing that banks are hurting the country. On the issue of inequality, to me the central issue facing our nation, voters overwhelmingly believe inequality is growing and that the government should do something about it. So, if Warren’s a radical leftist, well I guess much of the country is as well.

The real problem is not that Warren is too left, it’s that we’ve allowed our politics and what is considered the “center” in our politics to be pulled farther right. That’s no accident. A lot of money has gone into convincing us that the moderate, centrist responsible thing to do is to lower corporate taxes, cut social security and basically let banks do whatever the hell they want. So yeah, Warren might be too liberal for the donor class, and Bill O’Reilly might want you to think that she’s too liberal for America, but America overwhelmingly disagrees. It is long past time for a course correction.

That doesn’t mean Warren can’t fundraise. In fact, she raised more in her Senate race than any other congressional candidate in the country. It turns out that there are a lot of folks who’d be willing to make a small investment in some actual people-powered, unbought democracy.

(MSNBC)

Although Ms. Ball finds that one might think Warren is too far left (seriously), all of her policies are wildly popular – the question remains, with whom? – Generally, the minimum wage is popular among a segment of the society that believes all things should be equal –and that tacking on the price of a raise to the customer is not an issue, nor the burden the small employer – go figure. – Who needs jobs and affordable groceries/fast food anyhow?

Inequality in voting does not keep most American’s up at night –there is an old history book, circa 1860, that offers an overview on the duty to vote: Once, in one place, and as a citizen, one got a ticket to vote – granted women were not given that ticket – times have marched on but the principals are the same.

Yes, the banks, we can all agree we’d love to have more in them, but, stretching the hard earned money of those still employed in order to put money into savings is becoming more difficult.

Had she said, nice old lady, a professor, looks like a grandmother, who can’t trust their grandmother – and she’s feisty, a carpetbagger from Oklahoma who suggested she had some Cherokee blood in her veins (the tribe hotly denies), in order to get tenure at Harvard. – So smart, and not above a bit of larceny.

Presidential Material – absolutely, especially if one is one the left –watch for a Warren center-right makeover and that will be the writing on the wall.

Obama Scandal Tanks MSNBC Ratings - Quality versus Politics – the Decline of MSNBC and Lack of Substance

The jury is out - boring, one-dimensional programming is only sustainable for a short period of time - image mediate.com
A theory that the problems dogging the Obama Administration is the root cause of MSNBC’sdismal rankings this past week – the networked pulled only 83,000 in the coveted 25-54 demographics, placing last behind CNN’s Headline News Network. (Deadline.com) The fact that the content has not changed over the past seven years, regardless of which commentator is on-air, is the main problem this network faces. In the grand scheme of cable news programming, the word “news” is an integral part of the programming, which, MSNBC does not offer in any great measures. The competition, Fox and CNN, placing first and second respectively, although considered politically leaning news programs, the fact that they have dedicated newscasts, gives these networks the edge. Talking heads aplenty, as well as programming that features both sides of the political spectrum can be found on these networks as well. Unfortunately, MSNBC’s format of talk, talk, talk and one-dimensional political rhetoric is only sustainable for a short period of time.

Generally the network does best in a general election year, however, at this stage one could easily look at multi-year rankers and get the gist – the other guys must be doing something other than three to four recognizable “commentators” who spend more time ranting that their competitive network counterparts.

One would think that after having thrown good money after bad for an extended period of time, somebody might get the hint – it’s time to change the format. There is certainly a market for the counter-culture that is MSNBC – college students should be enamored, as well as those who lean left politically – yet it’s those individuals in the middle, neither right nor left, that make up the bulk of those who are watching cable news. Although the argument can (and has) been made that both CNN and FOX are politically “biased”, they at least offer other segments that are more in gear with the major networks rather than a cable basic.
Personalities are key as well, considering those whose successes are both on and off screen at the “other networks” should apply as a key hiring or firing point for anyone who has any sense left at the network that can’t quite get out off the ground. Aging old white men, with little to no sense of humor, who are not anchors, should have something to recommend them – besides being comic fodder for other networks and talk radio hosts.

The fact that the Administration is under the gun, is not at issue, regardless of how far the crew at MSNBC either avoids or dismisses or outright defends, the IRS Scandal, Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Wire-tapping the AP, etc.. Perhaps if someone got the bright idea of reporting, then discussing issues (find one), rather than spending far too much time tearing down the “other guy” or an entire political party, they might just attract a broader audience, or at least hold onto those who had watched during the general.

Regardless the content and the delivery have made MSNBC the cable network equivalent of Air America. Dissent and discussion are worthy of programming but changing it up, on occasion, is what continues to draw numbers for the competition.

MA - Deval Patrick to Announce Kerry Senate Replacement on MSNBC – Last Word - Replacement to be “out-of-the-box”

The Next Interim U.S.Senator from MA? Patrick will announce today. - Image: journalism.nyu.edu Governor Deval Patrick will announce his choice of interim U.S. Senate Replacement today. He will go on to discuss the weighty decision in of all venues, MSNBC’s “The Last Word”:

From Twitter:

Thursday at 10pm ET, @MassGovernorDeval Patrick joins @Lawrence to discuss who will temporarily fill John Kerry's Senate seat. @msnbc

Patrick, according to the Boston Herald, will choose a replacement that is “out-of-the-box”, bringing up names of political insiders, who are normally behind the scene, rather than those who are begging for the seat (See Barney Frank). The bet is that whoever the choice might be will be calculated to help the Governor and his legacy – possibly towards a run at the oval office in 2016, although that is possible, it is highly improbable in light of the Progressive push for Elizabeth Warren to be the next Barack Obama.

Kerry should be easily confirmed as the next Secretary of State, a position he has coveted for some time. The anti-war movements, second best icon next to Jane Fonda, will be easily confirmed in the U.S. Senate. The Replacement will be in place until the Massachusetts Special Election which will be held in June, on the 25th. There will also be a primary, that date has been set for April 30. (Fox-Boston) To date, only one individual has thrown their hat into the political ring, U.S. Congressman, Ed Markey.

Although the MSM is suggesting that former Senator Scott Brown might run in the special election, better odds are on Brown running for the Governor’s office in 2014. That said, Brown might run against Markey in the special election, and forgo running in the 2014 Senate Election, in favor of the Commonwealth’s top job. Try as anyone might, there has been zero inference from Brown as to his plans at this point. The aforementioned is pure speculation by the media.

As to the MSNBC announcement by Patrick, that does put Patrick on a national stage (of sorts), chock full of progressive stalwarts, and sending a message to the national “base” that Patrick is serious about a run. This after Hillary Clinton supporters have launched a “Super PAC” for a run in 2016. One might speculate that with Clinton’s health questionable, and the beating she took by a hostile press in the 2008 run for the Presidency, not to mention the use of “super delegates” to push Barack Obama to the nomination (in spite of the popular vote in the primary going to Clinton), she might reconsider. Either way, it is a long way from 2016, and the conventional wisdom is that whomever runs the Progressives in the Democrat Party, will make the ultimate decision as to whom “they” want to be the next “Obama”.

As to the interim Senate Replacement – bet on a “safe” choice and a political insider – sorry Barney!

Gallop: Obama’s Approval Stagnant at 47% Despite Lame-Duck Successes, Mike Huckabee - 2012 Speculation As Challenger to Obama

2012 Hypothetical Race: Huckabee vs. Obama

Gallop released their daily presidential tracking for Dec. 30th with the President’s Approval rating remaining stagnant at 47%. 46% of the nation continues to disapprove of the Presidents job performance. Meanwhile, the 2012 GOP speculation heightens. A recent MSNBC report (video shown below), is tagged with the headline “MSNBC Promotes Huckabee”. The gist of the MSNBC report is a positive/negative look at the potential 2012 presidential candidate, former Governor Mike Huckabee. Huckabee is noted as being a conservative who does not immediately attack Democrats or the President, rather assesses each individual issue, on the other hand, the report begins with the, now typical moniker assigned to Huckabee: Baptist Minister. The “Baptist Minister” citation is a liberal “call to alarm”. The left views Governor Huckabee as “right wing religious nut” rather than his more updated calling as two and one half term Governor of the State of Arkansas. One would think that in a political arena, the fact that Huckabee was a successful Republican Governor in a traditional southern Democrat state might trump the fact that he was, in his lifetime, an ordained minister.

Huckabee, in 2005, was one of Time Magazines “American’s 5 Best Governors":

Huckabee has approached his state’s troubles with energy and innovation, and he has enjoyed some successes. Most notably, he created ARKids First, which offers health insurance to poor children and has helped reduced the percentage of uninsured Arkansans under 18 to 9% in 2003-04, compared with the 12% for the nation and 21% for neighboring Texas. Since he became Governor in July 1996, welfare rolls have declined by nearly half, and last year the state’s economy grew 4.4%, beating the national average of 4.2%.

The attacks on Huckabee during the 2008 GOP General Primaries were based on his fiscal policy – the man who created a budget surplus in Arkansas, raised the level of education, and generally improved almost every aspect of the State’s government (Again winning not one, but two terms as Governor in a heavily Democratic state), actually increased taxes. The New York Times ran the following article on Huckabee and the attacks from a particular right of center fiscal “Club for Growth”:

During Mr. Huckabee’s tenure as governor, he did raise taxes to improve the state’s roads and schools, with the support of both Republicans and Democrats in the state legislature. He ended his tenure with an $800 million budget surplus.
Mr. Huckabee lowered some taxes as well. But, on balance, he raised more than he cut and that’s behind the Club’s disdain for Mr. Huckabee.

What was left out of that particular article, as well as advertisements denouncing the Governor, was the fact that several states were forced to raise taxes due to: Federal Mandates increasing State's services.. Additionally, one must also be reminded that America’s best President (blog opinion), Ronald Reagan also raised taxes on more than one occasion.

As conservatives try to out-Reagan one another, the one man that can lay claim to actually having governed like the “Gipper” is that rascally Baptist Preacher and former 2-1/2 term Governor of the State of Arkansas. Should Huckabee actually decide to run, he would do well to counter the naysayers with a bit of historical fact.

As of this moment, however, every prominent Republican is included in the list of possible candidates, and the President may have dodged a primary challenge from the left of the Democrat party (Charles Rangel), however, it remains to be seen if a challenge will be mounted by a more moderate Democrat (Dick Morris via Fox News as well as rampant speculation from the press in general). It is simply, a time to speculate, with no clear idea of who will actually aspire to the nation’s top job in 2011-2012.

Note: Huckabee led Obama in hypothetical match up as of 11/4/2010 in CNN poll,(Politico) The poll referred to on MSNBC is from Quinnipiac Nov. 22nd, in which overall voters would prefer another candidate to Obama: 49-43%

MSNBC Video

New York Times to Stop Printing Paper – Move to Web Based Platform Entirely – Date TBA

New York Times’ Arthur Sulzberger, speaking at a London based conference, made the announcement that at some point in the future, the Times would cease its print publication. In reading the article, one notes that a date was not given, however, the author does point to the publications dire financial straights, and the fact that unless an investor is found quickly, the paper will go the way of the Zeppelin.

The Times, once known as the Paper of Records, was thought to be invincible, however, as circulation for certain papers is rising, those with a left-leaning political editorial board, find themselves loosing subscribers almost as fast a Obama’s approval rate in dropping. It makes sense for these types of publications to take their point of view reporting to an online only venue.

Will teh nation miss the headlines blaring “U.S. Top Secret Plans Revealed....” (Fill in the blank).? It’s difficult to tell, with MSNBC’s ratings and the decline of the Progressive Times, surely those who are stakeholders should rise to the occasion and demand these individuals start reporting the news, rather than editorializing teh entire publiations/broadcast. It is their only chance for survival and has been from teh beginning. What is ironic is that the one force blamed for the demise of print – the internet, is where Sulzberger plans to make a stand. They should be mindful of the competition; however, news blogs such as the Huffington Post are well established. It is a question of changing from an editorial based “news” publication to a straight news publication or goes the way of the Zeppelin. How many more layoffs will be played out in newsrooms across the country, especially in these hard economic times, if the industry does not get back to its original format? Political Zealots have no place in a newsroom, not in a Republic.