…about Opt Out passing that he’s offering Republicans his support for Right-to-Work legislation if they vote “No” on HB 50. If that deal happens, the Governor should at the very least be expelled from the Democratic Party by Chairman John Daniello and then attempts should be made by the General Assembly to remove him from office. I am looking up the impeachment procedure under the Delaware Constitution as we speak.
The President lays out why new, high-standards trade agreements are important for our economy, our businesses, our workers, and our values.
Governor Markell highlights ongoing progress towards preparing Delaware students for the new economy, including that more Delaware high school students are taking and passing college-level Advanced Placement tests.
So the Governor and the President are taking on the liberals in their party this week.
Eric Holder is free!
The Senate confirmed Loretta Lynch yesterday in a 56-43 roll call after a long delay necessitated by Republican racism. The Republican senators who voted for Lynch are Susan Collins of Maine, Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, Thad Cochran of Mississippi, Jeff Flake of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Orrin Hatch of Utah, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, Mark Kirk of Illinois, Rob Portman of Ohio and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. Johnson, Kirk, Portman, and Ayotte all face tough reelection battles in blue states, and a no vote would have guaranteed their immediate defeat in a presidential year. Flake, Graham, and Hatch had approved her previously, in their roles as members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. So a no vote now would have made them look like fools. More so than normal. Collins is a Maine “Moderate.” The enduring mysteries are Cochran and McConnell. Cochran is an old school Senate hand, so that may explain his vote. McConnell’s vote is, I suppose, an apology.
SENATORS VOTED Thursday to confirm Loretta Lynch as the next attorney general by an embarrassingly thin margin of 56 to 43. It was embarrassing not to Ms. Lynch, who clearly deserved confirmation, but to the Republicans who voted against a nominee who should have breezed through.
“A week before a closely watched U.S. Supreme Court hearing on the issue, public support for gay marriage reached a new high in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll, with 61 percent of Americans – more than six in 10 for the first time – saying gays and lesbians should be allowed to marry legally.”
“Identical or similar majorities favor gay marriage on two key issues before the court: Sixty-one percent oppose allowing individual states to prohibit same-sex marriages. And 62 percent support requiring states to recognize gay marriages performed legally in other states.”
A new CNN/ORC poll finds President Obama’s approval ratings have reached their highest mark in almost two years.
“48% of Americans approve of how Obama is running the country, compared to 47% who disapprove. That’s the highest mark since May 2013, the last time a plurality of Americans backed the president in the poll. [Fifty-two percent] believe the economy is either ‘very good’ or ‘somewhat good.’”
Obama now is as popular as Ronald Reagan was at the same point in their second terms. The President’s approval rating has increased with 18-29-year-olds (57%), women (51%), Democrats (88%), and liberal Democrats (97%).
This is devastating news for the Republicans, who have based their entire existence, yet alone their 2016 campaign strategy, on the fevered alternate reality notion that Obama is this despised weaking mealy mouthed tyrannical dictator, who is both a radical black Christian but also a Muslim socialist communist. Republicans have been arguing that a win for Hillary Clinton in 2016 would equal an Obama third term. The question Republicans forgot to ask: what if America wants an Obama third term?
The correct answer is: I wouldn’t attend a homosexual wedding because to attend is to give public credence to the bastardization of marriage. That is to say, the answer above is the answer that doctrinaire Republican primary voters are looking for. And yet, that so many candidates got the answer FLAT WRONG, may say something […]
Charles M. Blow asks “Has the N.R.A. Won?” Yes, they have, and it is time we liberals give up on gun control.
It is now fair to ask whether the National Rifle Association is winning — or has in fact won — this era of the gun debate in this country. Gun control advocates have tried to use the horror that exists in the wake of mass shootings to catalyze the public into action around sensible gun restrictions. But rather than these tragedies being a cause for pause in ownership of guns, gun ownership has spiked in the wake of these shootings.
A striking report released Friday by the Pew Research Center revealed that “for the first time, more Americans say that protecting gun rights is more important than controlling gun ownership, 52 percent to 46 percent.”
Look, it doesn’t matter the reasonableness of gun control measures. It almost always gets painted as some sort of tyranny, as if your Second Amendment rights are violated if you cannot purchase this Class 3 Scud Missile launcher.
Dana Milbank takes apart the latest anti-equality argument:
As the Supreme Court prepares to take up same-sex marriage next week, conservative scholars have produced a last-ditch argument to keep the scourge of homosexual unions from spreading across the land: Gay marriage kills.
They’re saying that legalizing same-sex marriage will cause 900,000 abortions. The logic is about as obvious as if they had alleged that raising the minimum wage would increase the frequency of hurricanes. If anything, you’d think that more same-sex marriages would mean more adoptions.
I don’t even understand the possible connection, let alone logic, in such an argument. Perhaps these evil conservatives are threatening the court in some fashion by saying if they approve marriage equality, the conservative right will start having abortions. Yes, it is insane, but so are most conservatives when it comes to their bigotry towards gays.
When Scott Walker went as the first pick to Pandora, I was a little surprised. But that was because I wasn’t tracking on the fact that Walker had recently won the Koch Brother’s primary, thereby tying down unlimited financial resources for the duration of the campaign. And that’s what makes this race fascinating. In the […]
This is a straight up grab from the Rude Pundit.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, the Rude Pundit feels your pain. He’d love, love, love for a real liberal to run for president. He says this pretty much every election, often supports whatever quixotic candidate is taking a shot this time until he (and, sadly, it’s only been “he”) drops out, and then votes for the moderate who he mostly agrees with on Supreme Court picks. In 2008, he supported Barack Obama because he thought the movement Obama had started would be transformative, not realizing that the president cared less about the movement than about governing from the presumptive middle (which, truth be told, Obama’s pretty damn good at). Obama didn’t move left. The middle moved right.
This time, though, it seems as if we’re not getting the token liberal. And we’re not getting anyone of color. Those who are remaining are either the white liberals who say they’re not running – Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders – and the white dude who might – Martin O’Malley. If that liberal appeared, the Rude Pundit would love to jump on that bandwagon. But he or she won’t be there this time. As much as we want to say that Hillary Clinton should have a primary candidate or whatever other bullshit we want to hide behind, the truth of the matter is, as everyone knows, very, very simple. Hillary Clinton is the nominee. She is more or less running as an incumbent. Last week, the Rude Pundit said this and was attacked on Twitter (which is the rhetorical equivalent of a gnat buzzing by you) for being racist because somehow he was dissing Obama. Sorry, but, Alan Keyes’ paranoia aside, Obama can’t run. And there is no man or woman of color who is even on the bench at this point, something that better be corrected or the Democrats will seem as out of touch as the Republicans.
So what are we left with?
HILLARYMENTUM!!!! A new national CNN/ORC survey released today shows Hillary Clinton laying waste to the entire Republican field. This poll is significant because it is the first poll post the announcement by Clinton that she is running for President.
Clinton 55, Rubio 41
Clinton 56, Bush 39
Clinton 58, Christie 39
Clinton 58, Paul 39
Clinton 58, Huckabee 37
Clinton 59, Walker 37
Clinton 60, Carson 36
Clinton 60, Cruz 36
These numbers are apocalyptic for the Republicans, especially when you consider my view that the most likely nominee in such a crowded field will be Ted Cruz. Why do I believe that? First, because in such a crowded field, it will be easy for the the winner of the primary to be a person who only getws 15-20% of the total primary vote. The candidates that inspire a small but fanatical following, like Ben Carson or Ted Cruz or even Mike Huckabee, may win these crowded primaries. And if they do that, they get all of the delegates. There is no proportional split of the delegates in Republican primaries as there is in the Democratic primaries. That means the winners would walk away with the vast majority of the delegates, and then, thus, the nomination. Second, some of the more palpatable candidates to the general electorate (Bush, Rubio, Walker, Graham) will base their campaigns on their electability, about how they the best candidate to take on Hillary in a general election. If polls continue to show Hillary trouncing every possible candidate by similar margins, then the electability argument is shit and you might as well go with who you really love and then maybe, just maybe, you’ll get lucky.
So this poll attracted three times the number of votes as the average our other polls received, with a large majority being for strongly approve. Pay attention Geezer, that is the definition of freeping a poll. Freeping is a slang term going back to the early days of political blogs and online polls. There was this conservative site called Free Republic, and their denizens would be instructed to go out and find online polls and vote massively for the conservative option. They would FReep the poll, with the FR standing for Free Republic. Now the term applies across the board, generally. Obviously the call went out on Friday to Gordon loyalists to vote in this poll. Or, New Castle County residents are so deliriously happy with County Executive Gordon that they go out of their way to find online polls to indicate their approval.
So what do the results tell us:
67% approve of Gordon, 38% strongly.
29% disapprove, 22% strongly.
So either you love Gordon, or you hate him.
According to a new survey by the Pew Research Center, about two-thirds of Americans know that innocent people can be killed via death penalty sentences, yet still support the death penalty: The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted Mar. 25-29 among 1,500 adults, finds widespread doubts about how the death penalty is […]
It is fascinating to watch and of course Mark Halperin would be at the tip of the spear of this bullshit. According to him and his interlocutor here, Hillary Clinton is “terrified of the left”. Setting up this narrative of Clinton vs “The Left” is all about demonizing “The Left” and its ideas in a way that Halperin would never do for the Tea Party — who are demonstrably dangerous. Which might be why he feels that he can do this — there’s no downside to him for taking sides against “The Left”. He won’t be the only one, of course, but this is the first I’ve seen of this narrative in the wild this cycle.
Also of note is that the partisan polarization occurs even though Americans aren’t all that split on policies or ideology. Their partisanship is more tribal than anything — the result of an ill-informed electorate. “In order to have an understanding of the ideology of your party and the opposing party you have to have a lot of information,” and “that’s something that just doesn’t happen for the majority of the electorate,” said Westwood. “However, most people understand their side is good and the opposing side is bad, so it’s much easier for them to form these emotional opinions of political parties.”
This leads to a grim conclusion: The problem with politics isn’t Washington but the electorate. Members of Congress, most of whom come from safely gerrymandered districts, are behaving in a perfectly rational way when they avoid cooperation with the other party and instead try to build support within their own tribe.
It’s the Fox News problem. Back in the day, there was a balanced media that punished extremism. But for 20 years now, there has been one channel dedicated to ideological news. That has led to having half the electorate being ill informed and rejecting any compromise, because their news anchors rejected reality and any compromise by not punishing extremism. So now you have a political party that rejects reality and compromise and does not punish extremism. The electorate is part of it, but Milbank has to look at HOW the electorate got uninformed.
Nancy LeTourneau on the dynamics between Hillary and Obama as we come up to 2016, because, if you haven’t already noticed, Obama is no lame duck and he will not leave the stage until his time is up, and Hillary is not running from him, she is running towards him.
The modern-day precedent has typically been set by presidents who found themselves embroiled in scandals during their second term – which contributed to their lame-duckness (Reagan with Iran/Contra, Clinton with impeachment and Bush with Iraq/financial crisis). The dynamics will be very different this time around.
And so it should come as no surprise that – as Chozick, Haberman and Martin point out – Hillary Clinton has decided to run on President Obama’s record rather than triangulate between he and Republicans.
Rather than run from Mr. Obama, she intends to turn to him as one of her campaign’s most important allies and advocates — second only, perhaps, to her husband, the other president whose record will hover over her bid…
Nick Merrill, a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton, said that she “is proud of what was accomplished, both as President Obama’s partner on critical issues of national security, and on the progress made on the domestic front” and that “a campaign would be about laying out her own vision for tackling our toughest challenges.”
Given the current political dynamics, that is a very good move.
A new Bloomberg poll finds Americans “are becoming more optimistic about the country’s economic prospects by several different measures. President Obama’s handling of the economy is being seen more positively than negatively for the first time in more than five years, 49% to 46% — his best number in this poll since September 2009.” But the survey “also reveals that about three-fourths of Democrats and independents, along with a majority of Republicans, say the gap is growing between the rich and everyone else — and a majority of women want the government to intervene to shrink it.”
This is horribly bad news for Republicans.
So for the first time ever, Delaware Liberal readers are neutral or have no opinion on someone or something. 50% said that they were either neutral, had no opinion, or didn’t know enough about Republican Treasurer Ken Simpler to have an opinion on him one way or the other. And that is logical, since Treasurer Simpler has not done anything yet publicly, nor has he been the typical annoying and grating Republican. 35% approve whatever it is that Simpler is doing, 24% do so strongly. 15% disapprove.
Jason is always fond of London’s odd gambling market, which you can find a bookie to bet on everything it appears. And the reason he is fond of it is because, to him, it is a true indicator of polling intention, because people are betting their real money on whether a certain candidate can win. And sure, you can put money down on an outlier candidate with high odds, but that candidate better have a realistic shot for the nomination and the Presidency. For example, if you put money on Ben Carson, you are a fool.
Hillary is by far and away the odds on favorite. Some outfits have her as an 11/10 favorite, or 5/4, or 6/5, or even money at 1/1.
Jeb Bush is next in line as a 7/2 favorite, or 4/1, or 5/1. Marco Rubio’s odds fall in a range between 7/1 and 11/. Scott Walker’s odds similarly range from 7/1 to 12/1 (though most have him in the double digits behind Rubio.