► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Archive for the ‘Polls’ Category

Don’t Try To Tell Me Obama Is Not A Muslim

by 1389AD ( 73 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Election 2008, Islam, Leftist-Islamic Alliance, Palestinians, Polls, Saudi Arabia at September 5th, 2010 - 2:00 pm

(Originally posted on 1389 Blog)
By CzechRebel

I have had more than enough of the speculation about whether Obama is a Muslim or not. The only way that you could argue that he is not a Muslim would be to make up your own definition of “Muslim” that is meant to exclude him.

Muslims consider the child of a Muslim father to be a Muslim. I am not aware of any exceptions. Many Muslims who are true to the tenets of their faith believe that a Muslim who truly adopts another faith is guilty of a capital offense and should be killed. There has never been any question that Barack Hussein Obama’s father was a Muslim. In addition, Barry’s Muslim stepfather raised him as a Muslim. Given those facts, we can conclude that Muslims believe that Obama is a Muslim. Were that not so, those Muslims who believe in the stated tenets of their faith would be calling for Obama’s execution as an apostate from Islam.

American Muslims support Obama

Do Muslims find Obama offensive? Apparently, not in America! A recent Gallup poll showed that a whopping 78% of the American Muslim population approve of the Obama Administration. All other religious groups showed a lesser level of approval. If Obama were a man who had left the Islamic faith, American Muslims would certainly not approve of him, and some would risk imprisonment to call for his death.

Obama in Muslim garb with Somali religious leader

Saudi Muslims certainly accept Obama

…Many thanks to Russkiy for translating this article. The translator has highlighted those portions of the text that he considers notable:

The image which appeared recently of Barack Hussein Obama wearing traditional Islamic clothing, accompanied by a Somali religious leader, has steered emotions and caused a wave of severe disapproval amongst American voters. A similar wave of anger and discontent came from Obama supporters, who accused his opponent Hillary Clinton of trying to tarnish his reputation by means of leaking this image to the public. Obama, in response to the rumour of his being a closet Muslim, has made an official statement, denying the rumours suggesting he a Muslim and stated that he has in fact been a devout Christian for more than twenty years, and that he regularly attends church services.

The sad part in all this is the fact that if he is indeed a Muslim, he has to resort to taqiyya and concealment in order to keep his chances of becoming president alive. In the light of September 11 events, and following the barrage of images, in which firebrand Islamic clerics incite terrorism, while at the same time no religious authority to this day has come out to condemn any of the major terrorist attacks and refute religious justifications terrorists rely upon in order to recruit followers, Islam has become associated with terrorism. The followers of Islam are now seen as crazy lunatics full of hate, intent on fighting the entire world, while at the same time being unable to manage their own affairs and reconcile themselves with the modernity. All this has blackened the face of Islam to such an extent that it became a liability and a sure thing to destroy campaign chances of the hopeful presidential nominee.

These stupid terrorist fools do not realise and are incapable of appreciating such a rare and precious opportunity for a Muslim to occupy the Oval Office. By their actions they probably have ruined chances of this Muslim immigrant from becoming president of the United States.

Read the rest.

Obviously, Obama did make it into the White House, depite the misgivings expressed in the above article, which came out before the 2008 US elections. I present it here as evidence that the Muslims in Saudi Arabia take it for granted that Obama is one of them.

Could Obama be a secret apostate from Islam?

So, there is no question that Obama is considered a Muslim in the Muslim community. But could he be a secret apostate, a man who has left the Islamic faith, though able to fool nearly all Muslims on this planet that he had not? Well, if that were so, he would be the opposite of Ronald Reagan in one more way. (Obama has already made a recession into a depression by increasing taxes and spending, in contrast to Reagan, who brought the country out of a recession by cutting taxes and spending.) If Obama is not a Muslim, then he is a great actor and will have a career waiting for him as a thespian when he leaves office. In fact, he would be such a good actor that all the films featuring actor Ronald Reagan would pale by comparison.

Look at the evidence

Obama’s behavior has been such that implies he is a Muslim, for example: his refusal to speak in the presence of a cross; his amusement at the ridicule of Jews’ and Christians’ holy book; his refusal to bring his wife to Islamic-dominated countries; his word choices such as “Islamic Republic of Iran” rather than “Iran” and “holy Koran” rather than “Koran”; he includes himself when speaking of the Muslim community; along with other little reminders that he wholeheartedly supports Islam. There were no Christmas presents for Malia and Sasha Obama, and the White House nativity scene almost got the boot. (See More Evidence that Obama is a Muslim and Even More Evidence that Obama is a Muslim.)

Other than having attended Jeremiah Wright’s Caucasian-hating ‘church,’ Obama has shown no signs of being anything other than a Muslim.

Obama is first in line to support the Ground Zero Mega Mosque, situated in a location to remind us of the Islamic 9-11 victory. Yet, I

► Hot Links

Post to Twitter Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to MySpace Post to StumbleUpon

The poll that scares the Dimocrats most

by Bob in Breckenridge ( 128 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Economy, Elections 2010, Elections 2012, History, Misery Index, Politics, Polls, Progressives, Republican Party at September 3rd, 2010 - 8:30 am

With yesterday (9-2-10), being two months until the 2010 mid-term elections, here’s some food for thought-

The poll that scares the Dimocrats most

Posted by Moe Lane
Wednesday, September 1st at 2:30PM EDT

It’s this one, from the never-to-be-sufficiently-hated-by-the-Left Rasmussen: and on its face it’s innocuous enough. It’s the partisan identification poll, and it currently lists Democrats at 35%, Republicans at 33.8%, and Neither at 31.1%. Unsurprising, based on recent events, right? – Also, it’s a poll of adults, so this probably means a Republican advantage among likely voters, as that’s the usual rule of thumb for these things. So, nothing really unusual here, right?

Wrong. If this poll is accurate, it’s a harbinger of DOOM for the Democrats.

I don’t pretend to be a professional pollster, but I’ve been dealing with polls on a regular basis since 2003, so I at least know the basics. And I know that – once you get past the pure technical details about whether or not a poll has gotten a true random sample, or whether there’s deliberate bias in the questions – the two major questions that have to be addressed about an election poll both touch on how well it snapshots the actual electorate.

For example: experience shows that a poll that samples 1,000 adults will have a result that is significantly different than one that samples 1,000 likely voters*. The trick is determining what a ‘likely voter’ is, which is why many pollsters at least try to work with the more quantifiable ‘registered voters:’ it doesn’t give you as good results, but it at least screens out the people who can’t vote. It’s also why pollsters try to find out who is enthusiastic about voting, and who isn’t. But that’s only half of the problem; the other half is determining whether or not the current partisan mix of voters has shifted since the last benchmark. That benchmark is usually an election; it’s a truism that, generally, Republicans vote for Republicans and Democrats vote for Democrats. So pollsters look at reliable exit polls, and they look at election results, and every so often they do new partisan identification polls.

And that’s what makes this such a problematic poll of Rasmussen’s for the Democrats. As the pollster noted, historically speaking:

In August 2004, the Democrats had a 2.6 percentage point advantage. In August 2006, they enjoyed a 5.4 percentage point advantage. In August 2008, the gap was 5.7 percentage points. See the History of Party Trends from January 2004 to the present.

…and if you look at the results for those years, you’ll notice that they trended between August and November in all three years towards the party that ended up ‘winning’ those particular election cycles. Which implies that the breakdown is going to be even worse for the Democrats in November. It might even be close to equal.

Why this matters is that a perennial complaint this election cycle is that pollsters keep using partisan breakdowns that assume no major changes between the fundamental makeup of the 2008 electorate and today’s. Yes, pollsters will address the enthusiasm gap – but there is a difference between a politician being down five points because of one party not being motivated to get out the vote and a politician being down five points because there are less members of that party to draw votes from. If Rasmussen is right – and there are a lot of people out there in this business who have a vested professional interest in getting Rasmussen perceived as being wrong – then the problems for the Democratic party will not be addressed in better appeals to their base; they’ll be addressed by changing the policies that are apparently driving voters into the Republican camp**.

And if they don’t, they will simply not be prepared for the psychic shock of Election Night.

Click here to read the rest.

► Hot Links

Post to Twitter Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to MySpace Post to StumbleUpon

Americans give Republicans edge over Democrats on major issues

by Rodan ( 152 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Elections, Elections 2010, Leftist-Islamic Alliance, Politics, Polls, Progressives, Republican Party at September 2nd, 2010 - 8:30 am

Just 2 years ago, Barack Hussein Obama and the Democrats where swept in a landslide.  Americans at the time rejected the Bush/McCain Compassionate Conservatism, which was Progressivism with a Conservative face. The Progressive Movement was riding high and now in one of the biggest changes in American politics, it’s on the verge of collapse. On almost every major issue, the Republicans are leading Democrats for the first time in years in the  Gallup poll.

PRINCETON, NJ — A new USA Today/Gallup poll finds Americans saying the Republicans in Congress would do a better job than the Democrats in Congress of handling seven of nine key election issues. The parties are essentially tied on healthcare, with the environment being the lone Democratic strength.

Read the rest: Americans Give GOP Edge on Most Election Issues

Clearly the Republicans have the advantage and this finding confirms a similar one done by Rasmussen. The issue driving people towards the GOP is the Economy. This same poll shows the Economy is voters #1 concern.

The economy the issue that Americans care about. It’s about jobs, financial security and money in people’s pocket. The Republicans should hammer the Democrats on the economy from now towards election days. As James Carville said “It’s the economy stupid” and he was right. Now let’s use it as a club to clobber the Progressives. This issue in conjunction with the Progressives and their  collaboration with Islamic Imperialists over the 9/11 Ground Zero Mosque is what will lead our side the victory.

If the Republican do get power, they must never again govern as Progressives. If they go leftists and appeasing Islamic Colonialists like they did under the Bush years, then a new Conservative party will emerge. They are being given another chance, they better not blow it!

Update: What gives hope for the GOP this time around are the young guns like Eric Cantor and Paul Ryan. They are aggressive and demolished Barack Hussein Obama at the Health Care debate.

Washington’s chattering class zeroed in Tuesday on a potential but still nonexistent leadership battle between House Minority Leader John Boehner and Minority Whip Eric Cantor after members of the press received their advance copies of the latter’s new book, “Young Guns: A New Generation of Conservative Leaders.” While the book may indeed elevate Cantor, who co-authored the book with Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan and California Rep. Kevin McCarthy, its title couldn’t make its purpose any clearer – the trio sets out to prove that there’s a new Republican Party emerging that’s younger, bolder and more diverse.

Boehner has given two major policy addresses in as many weeks to go toe to toe with President Obama as he sets the stage for a possible speakership that would make him his party’s official foil to the Democratic commander in chief. On Tuesday, Boehner addressed the 92nd American Legion National Convention in Milwaukee about the end of combat operations in Iraqas a precursor to Obama’s speech later in the evening. At the same time, about a dozen reporters in the Beltway had just finished combing through Young Guns and found only limited references to Boehner and took that to mean the Ohioan is on the outs.

But the book is less a preview of a leadership battle as it is a forced rebirth.

Personally I hope Eric Cantor challenges John Boehner for the Speaker position, should Republicans win the House. Boehner is an elitis Progressive Republican who needs to get out the way. Imagine House Speaker Eric Cantor and Majority leaders Paul Ryan! Barack Hussein Obama would have nightmares over that one!

Update III:Political analyst Larry Sabato has the The Republicans winning the house, winning 8-9 in the Senate and 8 governorships.

Let’s keep up the pressure!

► Hot Links

Post to Twitter Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to MySpace Post to StumbleUpon

UNDERemployment and the Greater Depression of 2010

by 1389AD ( 187 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Economy, Healthcare, Liberal Fascism, Media, Polls, Progressives at July 21st, 2010 - 2:00 pm

Underemployment: Obama’s dirty little secret

Depression-era photo: Free coffee for the unemployed

Even the best-qualified, highest-skilled, and hardest-working Americans are up against it these days. Yes, even those Americans who still have jobs! We all know that the official unemployment statistics are vastly understated, in that they focus only on claims for unemployment compensation. The stats do not properly account for older workers who have taken early retirement after losing a job; young workers who cannot enter the labor force; “discouraged workers” who are still looking for work, but whose unemployment benefits are exhausted; disabled persons who could work to a limited extent, but who aren’t being hired; and American citizens who have had to travel overseas, often at great sacrifice and financial loss, to find work.

But perhaps the biggest of the dirty little secrets hidden by the official unemployment statistics is underemployment. I know about this from personal experience. Despite all of my qualifications, I have not been able to find full-time employment in over two years. The reason? With all of the hidden ramifications of Obamacare looming over everyone’s heads, along with the other past and future attacks on private enterprise, nobody wants to hire full-time people at all if they can help it. Certainly nobody wants to hire someone over 55 for a full-time job where the employer will be forced to provide overpriced health insurance or be fined for not providing it. Some people may call it age discrimination, but it’s the government that is causing it, not the prejudices of private employers.

There’s no need to take my word for any of this. Look at any job board or want-ad listing and notice the proliferation of part-time, temporary, and contract assignments, and the relative absence of full-time jobs with benefits. For example, a retail store that would normally hire two or three full-time employees will instead hire five part-time employees for 15 to 30 hours per week, at minimum wage, perhaps with commissions, but no benefits. A recent Gallup Poll also reveals large-scale underemployment in the form of part-time workers who want, but cannot get, full-time employment.

The liberal elite wants it that way

Of course, the liberal establishment pretends not to know why unemployment remains so high. Case in point: NYT: Mystery for White House: Where did the jobs go? [H/T: Rodan]

That conundrum, which reclaims center stage in Washington this week, is this: Why is unemployment so high?

The whodunit has flummoxed economists in both parties for a year. In 2009, as the new Obama administration grappled with the financial crisis, joblessness rose nearly two points beyond customary recession forecasts.

Part of the uncertainty concerns why. More consequential now, as the administration and Congress determine what to do, is whether the unemployment spike reflects a short-term or permanent shift in demand for workers.

But seriously…

I have studied economics and I know this for certain: All they have to do is repeal Obozocare, resume drilling, seal the borders, and end the H-1b program, and unemployment will drop three points within a month. I guarantee it!

But none of that will happen until we somehow muster the political will to force our government to do that. Or until enough States secede and decide to govern themselves in the interest of their own citizens.

One way or another, we need to free ourselves from the predatory liberal elites who flout the will of the people and who serve only their own interests and those of our foreign enemies.

Depression-era unemployment line in NYC

The Obama administration, together with the liberal establishment in academia, the mainstream media, the NGOs, the foundations, the Ivy League, and the UN, all have reason to want unemployment to remain high. Why? Because, though it may make the Obama administration look incompetent in the short run, as it did with FDR, it will create more dependency on the government and increase centralized government power in the long run.

Dependency, the Liberals’ Natural Resource explains how this nefarious system works:

A Heritage Foundation report shows that thanks to multiple government programs, the proportion of Americans in some way dependent on government largess has suddenly jumped by 31.2% since 2001 after decades of much slower increases. Even in inflation-adjusted dollars, America now spends thirteen times more on public welfare than it did in 1965. Dependency has snowballed in health care, public welfare, and housing, and the upward trend seems likely to continue as Obama’s statist polices take hold and baby boomers retire. Indeed, the president plans to spend some $10.3 trillion in welfare over the next decades. In a nutshell, Uncle Sam is replacing the family, the church, private charities, and all other non-government sources of assistance, and this means regular jobs for the new caregivers. And it feels good to work for Uncle Sam: Benefits included, the average federal workers in 2008 earned double what those in the private sector took home. So it is hardly unexpected that since about January 2008, some 7.9 million private sectors jobs have disappeared, while 590,000 public sector jobs were created — and this trend seems to be multiplying. It’s a thoroughly modern ménage à trois of dependent citizens, well-paid government employees ministering to them, and harried taxpayers footing the bill.

Here’s what makes this “new wealth” so attractive: In today’s uncertain economy, it far outshines the old wealth of building things and selling them at a profit. For one, jobs ministering to the dependent are labor-intensive and immune to mechanization. Government jobs are also wonderfully secure. It is inconceivable, for example, that a counselor working with Vietnamese gangs in Los Angeles will be replaced by an industrial robot or that under-employed social workers will also be asked to direct rush hour traffic to trim labor costs. This is not the cost-cutting-obsessed airlines where passengers make their own reservations, print boarding passes, stow their own luggage, and bring their own food. Nor can these interventions be outsourced to foreign competition. Helping the less fortunate has a permanent “Made in USA” label attached — Toyota has no interest in tackling the pathologies of those living in Detroit.

The supply of these jobs-generating assets is also inexhaustible. America will never, never run out of this newly discovered “wealth.” We may deplete our oil and ravage our forests, but what are the odds of drug addicts, the mentally ill, young unwed mothers, and others needing intervention vanishing? Those mired in pathology are a truly renewable natural resource. Social problems do recede, but rest assured, replacements are easily found (e.g., sex addiction). In a pinch, just open the borders and receive a bountiful fresh supply. And compare the ease of setting up an in-school clinic to mentor anorexic, non-English-speaking adolescent girls with low self-esteem versus building a factory. The former is instantly shovel-ready.

Read it all.

In other words, if the government stops the private sector from offering relatively secure, remunerative, full-time employment to American citizens, that will eventually leave the government as the only source of good jobs on American soil. This is how the federal government creates a new class of Soviet-style apparatchiki. Of course, those jobs ONLY go to those who actively support the regime and do their part to enhance the careers of those already in power, while keeping everyone else down.

Now what?

Our goal is to re-empower ourselves and our families, and decentralize and take back control over everything that has been usurped from us. That means we need to go on the attack to discredit the liberal establishment and all its pomps and all its works, anywhere and everywhere it appears.

We must overcome not only economic underemployment, but the underemployment of the human spirit.

To that end, please turn your attention to this excellent article: Read the rest of this excellent article at America’s Ruling Class — And the Perils of Revolution. [H/T: doriangrey]

… Consider: The ruling class denies its opponents’ legitimacy. Seldom does a Democratic official or member of the ruling class speak on public affairs without reiterating the litany of his class’s claim to authority, contrasting it with opponents who are either uninformed, stupid, racist, shills for business, violent, fundamentalist, or all of the above. They do this in the hope that opponents, hearing no other characterizations of themselves and no authoritative voice discrediting the ruling class, will be dispirited. For the country class seriously to contend for self-governance, the political party that represents it will have to discredit not just such patent frauds as ethanol mandates, the pretense that taxes can control “climate change,” and the outrage of banning God from public life. More important, such a serious party would have to attack the ruling class’s fundamental claims to its superior intellect and morality in ways that dispirit the target and hearten one’s own. The Democrats having set the rules of modern politics, opponents who want electoral success are obliged to follow them.

Reducing the taxes that most Americans resent requires eliminating the network of subsidies to millions of other Americans that these taxes finance, and eliminating the jobs of government employees who administer them. Eliminating that network is practical, if at all, if done simultaneously, both because subsidies are morally wrong and economically counterproductive, and because the country cannot afford the practice in general. The electorate is likely to cut off millions of government clients, high and low, only if its choice is between no economic privilege for anyone and ratifying government’s role as the arbiter of all our fortunes. The same goes for government grants to and contracts with so-called nonprofit institutions or non-governmental organizations. The case against all arrangements by which the government favors some groups of citizens is easier to make than that against any such arrangement. Without too much fuss, a few obviously burdensome bureaucracies, like the Department of Education, can be eliminated, while money can be cut off to partisan enterprises such as the National Endowments and public broadcasting. That sort of thing is as necessary to the American body politic as a weight reduction program is essential to restoring the health of any human body degraded by obesity and lack of exercise. Yet shedding fat is the easy part. Restoring atrophied muscles is harder. Reenabling the body to do elementary tasks takes yet more concentration.

The grandparents of today’s Americans (132 million in 1940) had opportunities to serve on 117,000 school boards. To exercise responsibilities comparable to their grandparents’, today’s 310 million Americans would have radically to decentralize the mere 15,000 districts into which public school children are now concentrated. They would have to take responsibility for curriculum and administration away from credentialed experts, and they would have to explain why they know better. This would involve a level of political articulation of the body politic far beyond voting in elections every two years.

If self-governance means anything, it means that those who exercise government power must depend on elections. The shorter the electoral leash, the likelier an official to have his chain yanked by voters, the more truly republican the government is. Yet to subject the modern administrative state’s agencies to electoral control would require ordinary citizens to take an interest in any number of technical matters. Law can require environmental regulators or insurance commissioners, or judges or auditors to be elected. But only citizens’ discernment and vigilance could make these officials good. Only citizens’ understanding of and commitment to law can possibly reverse the patent disregard for the Constitution and statutes that has permeated American life. Unfortunately, it is easier for anyone who dislikes a court’s or an official’s unlawful act to counter it with another unlawful one than to draw all parties back to the foundation of truth.

Read it all.

► Hot Links

Post to Twitter Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to MySpace Post to StumbleUpon

Conservatives should seize Obama’s crisis

by Rodan ( 175 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Economy, Elections 2010, Liberal Fascism, Polls, Progressives, Republican Party, Tranzis at July 14th, 2010 - 2:00 pm

“Never let a crisis go to waste” is what Totalitarian Progressive Rahm Emanuel said. The regime of Barack Hussein Obama has been unable to take advantage of the current crisis and the American public has turned against his agenda. This is an opportunity for Conservatives to take advantage of Obama’s political crisis. Progressivism is being disproven as an Ideology and now is when the Right can begin to put a stake through its heart. The problem is the GOP is not aggressive and doesn’t go for the kill. If they don’t, this opportunity to destroy the Left might not come again.


It wasn’t supposed to be like this.

The Obama administration came into power with the political winds at its back, the media at its feet and Americans open to major change. The White House even had a slogan: A crisis is a terrible thing to waste.

The logic behind the axiom is unassailable. As Robert Higgs documented in his libertarian classic, “Crisis and Leviathan,” it’s crisis — not merely war — that is the health of the state. Crises melt frozen politics. They create opportunities. They give the government room to maneuver and grow.

And for a while, it worked that way. Democrats steamrolled the most ambitiously liberal agenda in at least a generation. Yet liberals are miserable. Their lamentations over what they see as President Obama’s lack of audacity punctuate the din, like ululating matrons at an Arab politician’s funeral.

Read the rest: Obama’s crisis is GOP’s opportunity

The Republicans need to offer a clear alternative to Obama and his Totalitarian Progressive ideology. This needs to be a battle of ideas, one which the Left can’t win. Conservatives need to step up the pressure and destroy the evil Tranzi Progressive movement. We should not let this crisis go to waste.

► Hot Links

Post to Twitter Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to MySpace Post to StumbleUpon

Zogby poll: Most self-described democrats and/or liberals flunk basic economics badly

by Bob in Breckenridge ( 90 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Economy, Misery Index, Polls, Progressives, Republican Party at June 10th, 2010 - 9:00 am

No wonder we’re f**ked. These are the friggin’ ignorant morons who are “leading” us right down the economic crapper. From the Wall Street Journal-

Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?
Self-identified liberals and Democrats do badly on questions of basic economics.

By DANIEL B. KLEIN

Who is better informed about the policy choices facing the country—liberals, conservatives or libertarians? According to a Zogby International survey that I write about in the May issue of Econ Journal Watch, the answer is unequivocal: The left flunks Econ 101.

Zogby researcher Zeljka Buturovic and I considered the 4,835 respondents’ (all American adults) answers to eight survey questions about basic economics. We also asked the respondents about their political leanings: progressive/very liberal; liberal; moderate; conservative; very conservative; and libertarian.

Rather than focusing on whether respondents answered a question correctly, we instead looked at whether they answered incorrectly. A response was counted as incorrect only if it was flatly unenlightened.

[...]

How did the six ideological groups do overall? Here they are, best to worst, with an average number of incorrect responses from 0 to 8: Very conservative, 1.30; Libertarian, 1.38; Conservative, 1.67; Moderate, 3.67; Liberal, 4.69; Progressive/very liberal, 5.26.

[...]

The survey also asked about party affiliation. Those responding Democratic averaged 4.59 incorrect answers. Republicans averaged 1.61 incorrect, and Libertarians 1.26 incorrect.

Read the rest: Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?

And on a somewhat related note, Obama gets pwned by Sgt. Joe Friday…

A tip of the hat to Denny, the grouchy old cripple himself!

► Hot Links

Post to Twitter Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to MySpace Post to StumbleUpon

Obama’s popularity hitting rock bottom – still room though for it to fall even lower!

by Speranza ( 51 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Polls at May 31st, 2010 - 9:00 am

What amazes me is that Obama is even at 42% which is way too high for his 18 months of abject failure. I guess the passing the buck to George W. Bush has not exactly resonated with anyone outside of the moonbat fringe of the Democratic party (and a certain blog owner). Barry, when a partisan Democratic hack like James Carvile calls you incompetent – it is time to wake up!

Hat tip – Weasel Zippers

by Toby Harnden

The first thing Barack Obama probably should have done was to order the livestreaming Oil Spill Cam to be turned off. As the President insisted to Americans that he was “singularly focused” on staunching the flow, there was that mesmerising image on their television screens of plumes of hydrocarbons gushing relentlessly into the Gulf of Mexico.

When any political leader feels they have to declare that they are “fully engaged” in an issue, it is clear that they are in trouble. Talking about it undermines the very point you are trying to make – not to mention that pesky Oil Spill Cam showing that, 38 days into the Deepwater Horizon disaster, not a whole lot had been achieved.

Even judging Obama by his words, he has fallen woefully short over what has now eclipsed the 1989 Exxon Valdez wreck as biggest oil spill catastrophe in American history. He may have described it as an “unprecedented disaster” in last Thursday’s press conference but a week into the crisis he was blithely stating that “this incident is of national significance” and rest assured he was receiving “frequent briefings” about it.

George W Bush’s unpopularity and perceived incompetence was encapsulated by the way he dealt with the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Candidate Obama branded it “unconscionable incompetence”.

Central to Obama’s appeal was his promise to be truly different. His failure to achieve that is now at the core of the deep disappointment Americans feel about him. At the press conference – the first full-scale affair he had deigned to give for 309 days – he appeared uncomfortable and petulant.

His approach to the issue was that of the law student suddenly fascinated by a science project. He displayed none of the visceral indignation Americans feel about pretty much everything these days – two-thirds now say they are “angry” about the way things are going – resorting instead to Spock-like technocratic language and legalese. “I’m not contradicting my prior point,” he stated at one juncture. During those 63 minutes of soporific verbosity, about 800 barrels of oil poured into the Gulf.

Read the rest Barack Obama’s credibility hits rock bottom after oil spill and Sestak

► Hot Links

Post to Twitter Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to MySpace Post to StumbleUpon

Gut check time for the Conservatives

by coldwarrior ( 61 Comments › )
Filed under Democratic Party, Elections, Politics, Polls, Republican Party at May 18th, 2010 - 7:00 am

Its election day…to use a football analogy, this is the end of the first quarter, halftime comes in November, and the end of the game is the Presidential election in 2012.

Its early in game and this is just a primary election but there are some very interesting races to watch. The three races that i will be paying rather close attention to are the PA-12 Congressional Race, the PA Democrat primary race fore senator, and the FL Senate race. Why is Pennsylvania so important today in this off year election? PA is an excellent barometer of politics in America. James Carville rightly called the state politically schizophrenic and described it as two cities separated by Alabama.  PA is a microcosm of the US electorate, lefties on each East-West end with conservatives in the middle.

The most important race in PA, and one of the most important nationally is PA-12. Why is the grossly mis-shaped and gerrymandered PA-12 such and important race?  PA-12 was Abscam-famous John Murtha’s seat.  Murtha was the deliverer of much pork to the Johnstown, PA area. He, as leading member on House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee funneled tons of low paying defense jobs into his district in return for the undying support of the proletariats that gladly took the deal he offered. Well, it looks like the voters in PA-12 might just vote in a Conservative Republican Tim Burns instead of the Democrat crony that was hand picked from Mutha’s stable of party hacks and ward healers.  This race has national implications as a barometer of just how angry the voters are and how much reach the Tea Party and the Conservatives have. If the Dems lose PA-12, which they have held since the Depression, there will be much consternation and fear in the Democrat Party planning rooms.  PA-12 is a mix of rural and urban and this is going to be a close race, be ready for many voting ‘abnormalities’ and ‘irregularities’ from the thug-left in the rat-hole, rusted out old hulk of a steel town that is Johnstown.

The next race is the PA Democratic Primary race between Benedict Arlen Specter and some other Democrat hack. It looks like the Democrats in PA aren’t buying Specters song and dance…what? don’t they trust him?  If the Dems reject Specter, this should sent a nice message to the Dem leadership that no one is safe.However, it makes for a tough race in November, when it really counts…Unless Benedict Arnold cant stand to lose and runs ans an Indie…

Likely Republican nominee Pat Toomey still runs strongly against incumbent Senator Arlen Specter, but Pennsylvana’s U.S. Senate contest is a dead heat if his Democratic opponent is Congressman Joe Sestak.

The presumed Republican candidate for PA Governor Tom Corbett wins in all scenarios in November ending Democrat control of the Governor’s Mansion while the R’s retain control of the State Houses.

The race in Florida between Rubio and Crist is important as a test of the power of the Tea Parties. They backed Rubio and more or less forced RINO Crist out of the race.  What is most interesting for the right, and terrifying for the left is that Rubio is Latin and he is not staying on the racist plantation run by the Left and the Progressives; he can lead many Latin and other ‘minority’ voters to reject the race baiting poverty pimps on the Left.  Keep an eye on this man Rubio, he is going places.

If anyone has any other important races, let us know and give us some background and we will add them here.

► Hot Links

Post to Twitter Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to MySpace Post to StumbleUpon

Poll: Obama lost almost half of U.S. Jewish support

by Bob in Breckenridge ( 128 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Election 2008, Politics, Polls, Progressives at May 10th, 2010 - 1:00 pm

From the “It’s about time” department:

It looks like a core group that supported President Barack Obama during his election is dropping their support for him by half. These kinds of numbers are astounding, and Democrats running for office in even safe blue districts should not necessarily be waving over the president during the campaign season to help them with their re-election campaigns, because no incumbent appears to be safe.

Arutz Sheva is reporting President Barack Obama has lost almost half of his support among Jewish Americans. A poll done by the McLaughlin Group asked American Jews if:

(a) vote to re-elect Obama, or (b) consider voting for someone else. 42% said they would vote for Obama and 46%, a plurality, preferred the second answer. 12% said they did not know or refused to answer.

The data on the 2008 presidential elections fares no better today for Mr. Obama either:

In the Presidential elections of 2008, 78% of Jewish voters, or close to 8 out of 10, chose Obama. The McLaughlin poll held nearly 18 months later, in April 2010, appears to show that support down to around 4 out of 10.

[...]

Read the rest: Poll: Obama lost almost half of U.S. Jewish support

► Hot Links

Post to Twitter Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to MySpace Post to StumbleUpon

Advice/Observations to the RNC and Chairman Steele

by coldwarrior ( 101 Comments › )
Filed under Elections 2010, Politics, Polls, Republican Party at May 6th, 2010 - 11:00 am

OK blogmocrats. How do we win in November?

keep it on topic.

(this and a check is getting sent to the RNC when we are done here)

This is not an open thread.

► Hot Links

Post to Twitter Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to MySpace Post to StumbleUpon

More Junk Social Science: the UW Study

by snork ( 109 Comments › )
Filed under Media, Politics, Polls, Racism, Science at April 29th, 2010 - 3:00 pm

A study from my alma mater (please don’t call Chucky the “Husky Blogger”), the University of Washington, is being trumpeted by the MSM as proof that tea partiers are racists. The study, such as it is, is pretty straightforward. They did a poll.

Led by Prof. Christopher Parker, the 2010 Multi-state Survey of Race & Politics examines what Americans think about the issues of race, public policy, national politics, and President Obama, one year after the inaugurationof the first African American president.

The survey is drawn from a probability sample of 1006 cases, stratified by state. The Multi-State Survey of Race and Politics included seven states, six of which were battleground states in 2008. It includes Georgia, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina, and Ohio as the battleground states. For its diversity and its status as an uncontested state, California was also included for comparative purposes. The study, conducted by the Center for Survey Research at the University of Washington, has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percent and was in the field February 8 – March 15, 2010.

Sounds all scientific and all that stuff. As a poll, there are a lot of questions (most of which don’t have good answers), but Newsweek decided to focus in on this:

For instance, respondents were asked whether they agreed with various characterizations of different racial groups. Only 35 percent of those who strongly approve of the tea party agreed that blacks are hardworking, compared with 55 percent of those who strongly disapprove of the tea party. On whether blacks were intelligent, 45 percent of the tea-party supporters agreed, compared with 59 percent of the tea-party opponents. And on the issue of whether blacks were trustworthy, 41 percent of the tea-party supporters agreed, compared with 57 percent of the tea-party opponents.

That’s proof of a higher incidence of racist attitudes, right?

Not so fast. Science isn’t just about asking dumb questions and getting dumb answers. When a survey is involved, you also have to ask why people would chose to answer a question a certain way. I propose an alternate theory: Tea Partiers are more honest.

The heavy hand of political correctness can make people say things that they don’t really mean, and those differences are completely explicable by a candor gap. They haven’t really proven anything in particular as far as root cause is concerned.

But that doesn’t prevent Newsweek from plastering this headline on the article:

New Poll Finds Tea Partiers Have More Racist Attitudes

Sloppy, or liars? You decide.

And to be clear, my criticism is directed mostly at Newsweek. The study itself seems to have been carried out using pretty standard methodology, and that conclusion wasn’t drawn in prominently in the study. It seemed to be implied though (after all, why do the study otherwise), and the questions themselves were designed to lead to this conclusion.

I also have some very specific criticism in the presentation of the  report itself. In the section “Is America Now A Post-Racial Society?”, there is nothing in the link that talks about intelligence, and yet in the body of the summary, they state that

Of those, only 35% believe Blacks to be hardworking, only 45 % believe Blacks are intelligent, and only 41% think that Blacks are trustworthy. Perceptions of Latinos aren’t much different. While 54% of White Tea Party supporters believe Latinos to be hardworking, only 44% think them intelligent, and even fewer, 42% of Tea Party supporters believe Latinos to be trustworthy

This doesn’t tell you squat without also talking about how the general public answers these questions. The most charitable conclusion is that the report was very poorly written and reviewed. The less charitable conclusion is that they deliberately wanted to mislead.

Again, sloppy, or liars? You decide.

► Hot Links

Post to Twitter Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to MySpace Post to StumbleUpon

McCain Losing Ground to JD

by Macker ( 116 Comments › )
Filed under Elections 2010, Polls, Republican Party at April 18th, 2010 - 1:00 pm

Methinks Senator McCain is starting to panic. His bulls**t ads flood the airwaves all over Arizona, as Rasmussen’s latest poll has him only five points ahead of former Congressman and former talk show host JD Hayworth.
As things stand right now, McCain leads Hayworth 47% to 42%, with 8% undecided, and 2%  preferring some other GOP candidate.  This should fire up the hearts and minds of every conservative in the 48th State, as well as those from the rest of the country who despise Senator McCain for his constant efforts to reach across the aisle.
I met JD at the Tea Party Express rally in Phoenix a few weeks ago. I spoke to him for a few seconds, and he didn’t shake my hand like, say, for example, Президент Оба́ма would. He shook hands AS A MAN! He is confident and he is ready to fight for Arizona and, more importantly, for the USA. Keep this man in your prayers and thoughts.

HAT TIP: Blogmocracy Readers

► Hot Links

Post to Twitter Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to MySpace Post to StumbleUpon

Progressive Fail

by snork ( 185 Comments › )
Filed under Economy, Politics, Polls at April 12th, 2010 - 7:00 pm

There’s all manner of good news in this Rasmussen report, but one thing jumped out at me.

Lower income voters are more likely than others to believe the nation is overtaxed.

Savor that. That is music to a conservative or libertarian’s ears. Why? Because the central, cardinal Big Lie that the prog left has been trying to peddle for longer than I’ve been alive is that the poor want more government, and more taxes to go with it, and conversely, the rich don’t.

Snot so. The people at the bottom understand that taxes are bad, even when almost half of Americans don’t pay income tax!

Also illuminating:

Not surprisingly, the tax issue provokes a wide gap between the Political Class and Mainstream Americans. Eighty-one percent (81%) of Mainstream American voters believe the nation is overtaxed, while 74% of those in the Political Class disagree (see more about the Political Class and Mainstream Americans).

Not surprising, but illuminating, because it dovetails perfectly with the first fact. The political class (see the link for a definition; he’s not pulling it out of thin air) wants more government, and the rest of us resoundingly don’t.

Read the whole thing; it’s all good news, including these nuggets:

75% of voters nationwide say the average American should pay no more than 20% of their income in taxes.

And

Forty-three percent (43%) of voters believe that the average American should pay about 10% of their income in taxes in exchange for the services provided by the government.

Now if we can just pass the balanced budget amendment…

► Hot Links

Post to Twitter Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to MySpace Post to StumbleUpon

The Tea Partiers are the Mainstream

by Rodan ( 104 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Elections, Elections 2010, Polls, Progressives, Republican Party, Tea Parties at April 5th, 2010 - 2:00 pm

The Totalitarian Progressive Movement has smeared the Tea Party Movement over and over again. They attack them as Fascists, Nazis, Racists and Christian extremists. However, this is clearly far from reality. A new survey by Gallup shows exactly what I have observed, the Tea Party Movement is mainstream America. These are average Americans who are tired of the elitesin both parties imposing their views on the public. They are sick of the Democrats with their Neo-Feudalist Ideology of elitist control and their transnationalist, One World foreign policy. They are also tired of the Republicans lying by claiming they are Conservatives when the elites of the party are Neo-Wilsonian Progressives who believe in Big Government and wars to impose Democracy in the Middle East. The Tea Partiers want their country back from the Elites and are a powerful voice.

PRINCETON, NJ — Tea Party supporters skew right politically; but demographically, they are generally representative of the public at large. That’s the finding of a USA Today/Gallup poll conducted March 26-28, in which 28% of U.S. adults call themselves supporters of the Tea Party movement.

Affiliation With Tea Party Movement

Read the rest: Tea Partiers Are Fairly Mainstream in Their Demographics

Americans are tired of Academics and their discredited economic and foreign policy theories. We want a government that represents the true will of the people. We will achieve this goal and the elites of the Republican and Democratic Party will be footnotes in history.

Update: Here’s the crowd reaction towards Obama as he throws the 1st pitch.

► Hot Links

Post to Twitter Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to MySpace Post to StumbleUpon

Poll: American Dream Dead

by snork ( 67 Comments › )
Filed under Polls at March 16th, 2010 - 5:00 am

This is an indicator of the foul mood of the American public. In a poll performed by Xavier University, more people surveyed were pessimistic about the next generation achieving “the American dream” than optimistic. The details are illuminating:

The data shows that “people are losing faith” in the idea that they can achieve whatever they set their mind to, said a release put out by Xavier’s Institute for Politics and the American Dream.

But outlooks were most grim among white respondents – only 29 percent of whites surveyed said the American Dream was in good condition, compared with 48 percent who said it is in bad condition.

Among black Americans, 39 percent were optimistic about achieving the American Dream, with 35 percent pessimistic. Latinos were optimistic by a 37 percent to 36 percent margin, and non-white’s were positive by 36 percent to 35 percent.

So if you’re unwhite, you’re as likely to be optimistic as not. But if you’re white, life is a bitch, and then you die. This has the makings of some serious shit.

Despite their pessimism, 67 percent of those surveyed said they are still confident they can achieve the American Dream in their lifetime, compared to 32 percent who said they are not confident.

Only 23 percent said it will be easier for the next generation to achieve the American Dream, while 68 percent said it will harder.

There’s a peculiar psychology that causes people to be more optimistic about themselves than other people. But there seems to be a broad consensus  that things are going to be harder for the next generation.

Next stop: the “crisis of confidence” speech.

► Hot Links

Post to Twitter Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Facebook Post to MySpace Post to StumbleUpon