Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Friday, December 30, 2016
Year-End Numbers to Ponder
These are vote totals in past presidential elections (slightly rounded).
Obama (2008) 69,499,000
Obama (2012) 65,916,000
Clinton (2016) 65,845,000
Trump (2016) 62,980,000
Bush (2004) 62,041,000
Romney (2012) 60,934,000
McCain (2008) 59,948,000
Kerry (2004) 59,028,000
Reagan (1984) 54,455,000
Gore (2000) 51,000,000
Bush (2000) 50,456,000
Bush (1988) 48,886,000
Clinton (1996) 47,402,000
Nixon (1972) 46,740,000
Clinton (1992) 44,910,000
Reagan (1980) 43,643,000
Now I'm a big number questioning guy, which means I don't trust numbers unless I can see them, know who offers them to me, and then inquire into the interpretation of numbers by nearly anyone and everyone. That being said, consider my thoughts on these numbers.
1. (2016) It is NOT true that if Hillary had gotten as many votes as Obama, she would have won. If all those votes were not in key states, she still loses. Then again, if her margin in California (2+ million) was redistributed to swing states, she would have won an electoral college landslide.
2. (2012) Obama got 3.5M less votes than he got in 2008. Same election, Romney got a million more than McCain received in 2008, but even with that 4.5 million vote swing, the end result was the same.
3. (1984) The voters really liked Reagan, look how far out of an orderly progression is his total that year. The same can be said of Nixon in 1972.
4. Voter totals go up year over year over year, with only minor exceptions. That math is based on birth rate versus death rate and has nothing to do with who is running for office or if the voters care, again with minor exceptions like 2008 & 1984.
5. As long as we have the electoral college; in any scenario with competitive race for the presidency, it will be more important where you get your votes, not how many you get.
Labels:
bush,
clinton,
election,
gore,
numbers,
Obama,
politics,
president,
presidential election,
trump
Friday, August 05, 2016
A 90 Day Decision
I have come to realize that my quadrennial rant on the U.S. presidential election has been heard before in 2012, 2010 & 2008. I also realized many of my liberal friends will never forgive me this time around. Trump is not McCain or Bush or Romney or even Nixon.
So . . . I herefore swear to not publish another blog on the election, nor shall I speak words aloud that put forward my now 48 year old position that the only way to change this decrepit system is to stop voting for either of the two major political parties.
Oh wait, I just said it. Well, no more. Not a single political word for the next three months. And, yes my friends, I will not be voting for Hillary and no that does not mean I am voting for Trump. Get a clue, this is not an either/or world we inhabit.
Also I will be disdaining all network or cable news. I will miss the 'Donald quote of the day' but I'll get over it. For me, I am off to the dandelion patch with my buddy Opus. You guys hang in there and cling to the tattered hope that Hillary isn't who she has always been.
Friday, July 22, 2016
and for the democrats
No we are not switching to Hillary because she has
You think she is really worth your vote, I dare you to READ THIS: 27 Questions for Hillary Voters.
Friday, July 08, 2016
Come On In
As you can imagine, this was going to be yet another commentary on the U.S. election. However, I am trying to wean myself from both the images and the rhetoric of that miasma.
Therefore today, I give you Carcharodon carcharias or the Great White Shark. Relate the image to whatever pops into your mind, as you remember the first time you saw Jaws.
Were you uncomfortable with your legs dangling down in the dark theatre?
No, No, No I'm not going there. The American electorate are not chum.
Friday, June 24, 2016
Who Are You Voting Against?
Tell the truth, at least to yourself. Are you planning to vote against either the republican or the democrat candidate this fall?
The truth.
I'll wait.
Next question: When was the last time either of the two major private political parties offered you a candidate you believed in? Or to put it another way -
Who was the last candidate for President you actually voted FOR?
It seems the electorate has bought into the premise that not liking one candidate is no reason not to vote for him or her because the "other guy" is so repugnant.
By the way for those not paying attention, this works both ways. For example:
Clinton vs. Bush
any Bush vs. anyone else
any Clinton vs. anyone else
Nixon vs. anyone
Come on admit it, you voted against at least one of those candidates.
I won't harp on it because my quadrennial political rant may be coming soon. So, I will just say - why not vote for someone you trust, like, appreciate, not hate. If that means skipping over both the democrat and the republican candidates, so be it. Your strong enough, your good enough and by golly I like you.
Now get out there and vote for someone who isn't another one of them.
Footnote: I couldn't find a graphic with the real negative numbers for The Donald and Hillary, they are now much higher than those shown above. And I promise I really am going to transition my blog away from the American political circus, just too many Killer Clowns to be amusing anymore.
Friday, June 17, 2016
NOT a political rant
Rather than offer up my Quadrennial Political Rant about the two party system, this year I am offering an articulate, reasoned exposition on why we must oppose the dualism of the republicrat, no matter who they nominate.
Here is Jill Stein, the Green Party's candidate for president on How to Solve the Disaster the Two Party System has become.
LINK
If you watch it, I'll put up more fun and informative posts and a lot less politics. I promise.
Friday, April 22, 2016
microaggressions
I've been wanting to say something about microaggressions for several months. The final straw came when students at the University of Michigan called police after someone chalked TRUMP 2016 on campus. I began to formulate both rant and reason but before I could lay out my wisdom in words I went looking for some visuals. What follows says more than i ever could of this moment in our cultural evolution.
Friday, April 15, 2016
Some things need to be believed to be seen
Did you read the title carefully?
How's your imagination today?
How about now?
Some things need to be believed in
to be seen as possible.
Friday, March 18, 2016
We Got Old
Last Tuesday demonstrated just how old my generation has become. We gave into the fears of age and voted for a corporate hack over a true revolutionary. Back in the day with another war raging and dividing the country we supported Eugene McCarthy, Bobby Kennedy and George McGovern. Now the 60+ plus "liberal" vote went to pro-war, pro-death penalty, pro-Wall Street Hillary Clinton.
Another Clinton, nearly another Bush. What happened to us?
I am disappointed in my peers and I am surprised. Have memories faded over the years or have aging fears and 401Ks become more significant than the progressive values we once held together?
I get it that enemies foreign and domestic are on your minds. ISIS, ISIL and all the other threats seem too big and scary. And Hillary has experience with those demons. She bombs them and supports right wing leaders to suppress them.
At home, Trump is looming but poll after poll have shown that Bernie beats Trump by a much wider margin than Hillary. You get no excuse on the home front.
So, to my aging Boomer friends, I say and will say again. I am disappointed in what the years have done to our values and to our fervor. Where did it all go? Why did so many of you, of us, never even look at Bernie Sanders.
I leave you with this memory. When we were protesting Vietnam, do you not remember how it was us (the young) against them (our elders). Families were divided. Parents and children did not speak.
Remember?
U.S. Senator Bernard Sanders is getting 80% of the youth vote.
How can we not remember when we were right where those kids are today.
Do you think we were wrong?
Friday, March 04, 2016
Size Does Matter
I was watching the primary results on Super Tuesday and heard something intriguing.
Let me be clear, I watched seven or eight channels, flipping between them to avoid having to listen a single word out of the mouth to any of the candidates or a single syllable from the foaming lips of Wolf Blitzer.
Amidst all the idiocy and repetitive obviousness, I did hear one compelling argument.
One of the talking heads said that in several of the crossover primary states, where voters could select which party primary to vote in and where independents could also vote, he identified three groups of non-republican-party-members voting in the republican primaries.
Group A: Pro-Trump all the way, including both independent and true crossover democrats.
Group B: Anti-Trump all the way, voting for Rubio, Cruz, Kasich, Carson or Beelzebub.
Group C: Anti-Republican independents and democrats crossing over to vote FOR Trump because he is the weakest candidate in the general election.
Obviously, Group C voters are my favorites. I have advocated for forty years that each and every vote in a presidential election should be a protest vote against the two party monopoly. I have voted Green, Independent, Socialist, Peace & Freedom and probably another couple now defunct third parties. I will do so again, unless the FeeltheBern movement finds a way to undermine the democrats heavy-handed anti-democracy tactics.
Let me be clear to all those with email, phone and face-to-face access to me. If Donald and Hillary are polling neck and neck on election eve come November, I will not be voting for her, never.
It can't be said often enough - when you vote for the lesser of two evils, you still get evil; even when one of the evils is a jack-booted specter of disgust.
Let me be clear, I watched seven or eight channels, flipping between them to avoid having to listen a single word out of the mouth to any of the candidates or a single syllable from the foaming lips of Wolf Blitzer.
Amidst all the idiocy and repetitive obviousness, I did hear one compelling argument.
One of the talking heads said that in several of the crossover primary states, where voters could select which party primary to vote in and where independents could also vote, he identified three groups of non-republican-party-members voting in the republican primaries.
Group A: Pro-Trump all the way, including both independent and true crossover democrats.
Group B: Anti-Trump all the way, voting for Rubio, Cruz, Kasich, Carson or Beelzebub.
Group C: Anti-Republican independents and democrats crossing over to vote FOR Trump because he is the weakest candidate in the general election.
Obviously, Group C voters are my favorites. I have advocated for forty years that each and every vote in a presidential election should be a protest vote against the two party monopoly. I have voted Green, Independent, Socialist, Peace & Freedom and probably another couple now defunct third parties. I will do so again, unless the FeeltheBern movement finds a way to undermine the democrats heavy-handed anti-democracy tactics.
Let me be clear to all those with email, phone and face-to-face access to me. If Donald and Hillary are polling neck and neck on election eve come November, I will not be voting for her, never.
It can't be said often enough - when you vote for the lesser of two evils, you still get evil; even when one of the evils is a jack-booted specter of disgust.
Friday, February 05, 2016
Iowa or Not
Am I happy about the caucus results from Iowa? Let's call it a tie.
BUT . . . let us also be consistent or contrarian, you chose.
Why the hell are 180,000 frozen Iowans in February determining who gets to plow on in the presidential race? Why are they using a coin flip to award delegates? Why was turnout on the democrat side down 33% from 2008?
Our election system makes no sense. None, zero, nil.
George W. Bush was president for eight years, even though he lost the election.
Sixteen states have effectively blocked between four and ten million voters from even registering. How are those DMV closures working for you white folks in Alabama?
Gerrymandering has rigged the congress for one party over the other for over 12 years. [See Florida Congressional District redrawing by rabid ferrets]
Not to mention, billionaires buy hundreds of hours of media time to spew out lies, fabrications and racist, bigoted, vicious venom. It all started with The Big Bribe.
This is how we determine who will be "The Leader of the Free World" with the power to send militarized drones to any place in that free world? Which is why staffers don't stand too close to the candidates.
Anyway, nicely done Iowa. Oh, and by the way, if you work the evening shift, let's say in a restaurant, a hospital or a police cruiser -- you don't get to caucus. You have to be present at 7 PM on a Monday evening in February or you are disenfranchised.
God Bless Vespucci Land.
Friday, December 04, 2015
Friday, October 16, 2015
A Question (#1 in a series)
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” -- John Steinbeck
How do you, how does anyone defend the right of the 1% to be greedy, avaristic bastards?
I asked that question of a friend of a friend, a known moderate republican. Okay, so I might have softened the wording just a bit, but I got an immediate answer.
"I don't know why anyone begrudges another person the right to make a lot of money."
I let that sit for awhile and then followed up with this: "Don't you think someone who has become wealthy based in this system of free enterprise. Don't you think they owe something to country that gave them the freedom to make all that money?"
"What exactly did the government give them?"
I had to go with the obvious answer: "Well let's see. Roads and railways to transport their goods, the Internet to advertise and make sales. An educated workforce via the public school system. Tax breaks . . . shall I go on?"
"What do you think they should give back?"
"Well, first it would be nice if they paid taxes and didn't ship jobs out of the country."
"But both of those are legal."
"So, you're okay with someone dodging taxes using IRS loopholes, while you pay your fair share and you don't come home to a swimming pool, a vacation villa and half a dozen luxury cars?"
"I am perfectly find with it. It's called the American Dream."
Clearly, this lady and others like her have a very different Dream than I do. Though their view of fairness does remind me of what happens some dark nights, only I call them -- nightmares.
art credit: timeline photos
Friday, September 04, 2015
Electoral Numbers
As we stumble and mumble towards a presidential selection still 14 months off. I wonder, what does it mean to win an election?
Generally speaking, the winner gets more votes than his or her opponent. The American Presidential election system does create the possibility that someone with fewer votes could be elected. In fact, it happened in 2000; when George W. Bush defeated Al Gore. But this post is not about the number of votes, but rather about the number of voters.
In the 2014 mid-term elections the republican party got 52% of the vote. But since only 35% of the voters turned out to cast their ballots, in fact, the winning party got 17% of the voters to show up on elections day to support them.
Yes, you can make the argument that "those who show up make the decisions." And there's always the old, tired saying about "those who don't vote got no right to complain." Blah, blah, bullshit!
My position is that a huge segment of the population are so sick of the gridlock in Washington. So tired of being so baldly lied to by politicians and their minions, they've stopped participating. Who can blame citizens for believing their votes mean nothing. Or worse, they are offered alternatives that are so gut-wrenchingly weak, they would rather stay home than support either of the two major parties.
So, long-time readers, expecting a third party pitch here? Nope, not yet, too early.
But I would like to offer some perspective from 31 years ago. The last time we had an actual landslide in a presidential election was 1984. Ronald Reagan the great and powerful savior of the conservative right won a stunning victory over Walter Mondale.
Let me ask you four questions about that election:
1) How many of the 50 states + the District of Columbia did Reagan win?
2) What percent of the vote did Reagan receive?
3) What percent of eligible citizens were registered to vote?
4) What percent of citizens cast their ballot for Ronald Reagan in this landslide election?
Got your answers? You know there's a trick in there somewhere right?
1) How many of the 50 states + the District of Columbia did Reagan win?
Walter Mondale won this home state of Minnesota and the District of Columbia. Reagan won the other 49 states and Puerto Rico. Now that's a landslide, right?
2) What percent of the vote did Reagan receive?
58.8% for Ronnie. Mondale barely eked out 40%.
3) What percent of eligible citizens were registered to vote?
In 1980, over 124 million voters were registered, which represents 71% of those eligible to vote.
4) What percent of citizens eligible to vote, cast their ballot for Ronald Reagan in this landslide election?
Of all those 18 years of age or older and not restricted by felonies or a few other legal barriers to voting, only 53% cast ballots in the 1980 Presidential election. Since Reagan won my a landslide margin of 58.8%, that means of those who could vote to elect the President of the United States, just of 31% of them elected Ronald Reagan in a "landslide."
Would you feel like you had a mandate to rule the country if you got 31% of the people behind you?
p.s. Donald Trump the current darling of American politics is hovering around 25% of potential republican primary voters, if you believe some questionable math. First, the polls do not discriminate between registered voters and just someone who picked up the phone and answered a few questions. What if a democrat gets the call? Why not say you're a republican and support Trump. Polls take the opinion of the voice at the end of the call, without any verification. Taking all the pseudo-math into account, somewhere round 9% of possible, perhaps, maybe voters are supporting Trump on a phone call. Frontrunner?
Friday, July 31, 2015
Donald Trump is NOT Running for President
Donald Trump may or may not be a good businessman. (See multiple bankruptcies). But he is damn good at getting rich, which is why he is pseudo-running for President.
That's right folks, The Donald and several other republican candidates, are not actually in the race to win it. The presidential primaries have become a get rich quick scheme.
Let's start with the Political Action Committees (PACs). Here's all you need to know about PACs, they can make unlimited contributions in and out of the electoral process independently of a candidate or a political party. Even though a PAC calls itself something uplifting and patriotic, there just money pits for the candidates to plunder.
Here are just a few of the current PACs:
Opportunity and Freedom (Rick Perry)
Keep the Promise (Ted Cruz) -there are 3 of these to spread out the donations
Pursuing America's Greatness (Mike Huckabee)
Our American Revival (Scott Walker)
America Leads (Chris Christie)
Right to Rise (Jeb Bush) - shouldn't it be: The Right Shall Rise Again
Make American Great Again (Trump) Wait! You thought he was using his own money?
You see if you don't get the nomination, as 20 or so candidates with PACs will not, then the money can be spent on other things. Remember the PAC can make "unlimited contributions in or OUT of the electoral process." So, lose the nomination and then after a much needed vacation, which the PAC will pay for; you go on a speaking tour. Say ten speeches at $100K each, that's a cool million. Who pays that much for a speech from a loser? How about your PAC.
Then we have the book deals. You (ghost)write a book, sell thousands of copies to your PAC, which makes your book a best-seller. Then have the PAC give them away at your rallies, which creates a tax write-off for your PAC. Want an example?
Ben Carson a black republican without the street cred of Colin Powell and no chance in hell of winning the nomination. He's a black republican! A couple of his books -- One Nation: What We Can All Do to Save America's Future and America the Beautiful: Rediscovering What Made This Nation Great currently an Amazon #1 in the Civics category. Plus you can get a "free" copy of Dr. Carson's autobiography, if you donate $25 to his campaign. Interesting use of the term -- free.
My point? Follow the Money. Donald Trump knows how to get rich and he is making a fortune off his bogus run for the republican nomination. Why bogus? Because nearly 70% of the electorate have already said they wouldn't vote for him under any circumstances.
So why run?
Besides being good for his enormous ego, it's really just because he can. The other reason is money. Donald Trump will come out of this charade richer than he went in and so will at least a dozen other "candidate$." Hillary did it in 2008 or did you miss that little bit of information.
So while The Donald is crushing the polls 15 months before the election in a field that no longer resembles a clown car but has bloated to a boatload of buffoons. Mr Trump isn't getting the nomination because he ain't actually running for president.
Friday, May 29, 2015
Bernie Sanders
I was watching some cable talking heads the other day. The questions was asked: "Since Bernie Sanders has no chance of winning the presidency, what exactly are his goals?" The response was some mumble-jumble about income equality and monkeys with wings.
I bring this up only to mention that in May of 2007, if the same question were asked about Barack Obama, the answer would have been roughly the same. No chance, just another politician inflating his ego. Hillary has got it in the bag.
I'm just saying' . . .
Thursday, May 14, 2015
Many Americas
Where to start, where to start?
During the Baltimore riots. In the aftermath of the Baltimore police murder. Following the confrontation in urban Maryland. In the turmoil surrounding the clash in Baltimore. The events in Ferguson, Florida, Texas, Colorado, Baltimore, Detroit, Lexington etc. prompted -
A 2013 Guardian article by David Simon
of "The Wire" fame resurfaced. Mr. Simon is from Baltimore. The meme from the article: "There
are now two Americas. My country is a horror show."
The idea, of course, is black and
white America or perhaps rich versus poor America or both. Then, while Baltimore burned, Mr. Simon
blogged what was meant to be an impassioned plea for rioters to "Go Home." Unfortunately, like Wolf Blitzer, it appears Mr Simon doesn't
get it; middle-aged white guys seldom do.
A few days later, also in The
Guardian, a response appeared: Go Home David Simon, Without Justice in Baltimore, There Can Be
No Peace. I recommend all three
articles as fine exemplars of what I can only describe as dualistic thinking
about race, justice and ecumenic inequality in America.
Barack Obama is famously misquoted
as saying: "There aren't red States and blue States but the United
States." Again, playing on the subconscious duality metaphor that
permeates the human psyche.
'Two Americas' is way too simplistic.
There are multiple economic classes in this country. All but one or two getting historically screwed by the present system of injustice for all.
First Class: Number one with a
bullet are the Uber-Rich, the Oligarchs, the 1%. To be fair the lower end
of the 1%, those who might actually have jobs, well it doesn't matter, they're
all dead meat when the revolution comes. Eat the Rich!
Second Class: Doing fine with jobs
paying stupid amounts of money for 'skills' that mostly are involved with creating
wealth. About an equal split here between productive capitalists and Wall
Street leeches.
Third Class: Still holding on to
their middle-class homes, lives, schools and families. But looking down to see
where others have gone and running a bit scared that there for the grace of tax
loopholes, so go they.
Fourth Class: Formerly members of
the middle-class. Got their butts handed to them in the '08 economic
debacle, did not get bailed out. Sinking fast but still not ready to
overthrow their tormentors.
Fifth Class: Never made it to the
top or the middle but definitely taking a major hit despite not having much to take away. Surviving on all
those "socialist" programs the republicans keep cutting.
Sixth Class: The new poor. Never
got foreclosed out of their homes, because they were always renters. Did lose
jobs, never got them back, since those jobs were moved to India, Mexico and Thailand.
The Poor: always been, always
will be and slipping further down the survival ladder every day.
The Really Poor: These are the
citizens Simon was talking about, those living in such entrenched poverty there
really is no way out. No bootstraps down here, hell no boots either.
America today is a society based on
class, not opportunity, not democracy or even meritocracy. Class in America
is about money. How much you got. How much you can keep. How little of it
you pay in taxes. And how much of it you need to spend to keep your
privleged position safe by paying protection money to the politicians.
Dear Liberal Friends: Save your ragged words about
cynicism and hope for the future. You can't cash those in and that's what
counts in Amerika today.
Thursday, April 23, 2015
2016
I know politicians want to tell us that it's - Right Around the Corner or It's Too Big to Limit to Just a Few Short Months. Well, first of all to those statements and other justifications for having half a dozen presidential candidates more than a year and a half before the election, I would like to offer a sincere and resounding BULLSHIT!
However, barring that cow flop truism. I give you the line-up for next year. And I will point out once again, that the most populous state, my state, will be voting last, long after the nominations are already decided. Good move again, Golden State.
JANUARY 2016
January 18: Iowa caucuses
January 26: New Hampshire caucuses
-once again the highly representative voters of these two great states will decide the frontrunners for president by coming out one night in the dead of winter to the local school cafe and standing in little groups talking about climate change or chicken feed.
FEBRUARY 2016
February 2: Colorado & Minnesota caucuses; New York & Utah primaries
-yes, at least for now an actually significant state (NY) will vote early; though in 2012 the NY legislature delayed the primary until April and may do so again.
February 6: Nevada caucuses
February 13: South Carolina
February 16: North Carolina
February 23: Michigan
MARCH 2016
March 1: Super Tuesday. Colorado caucuses; Florida, Massachusetts, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia primaries.
-it will likely be all over for both parties after this batch of primaries, since the conventions are not until summer, this means we get 3+ months of non-campaigning campaigning, during which time the candidate's minions tell as many falsehoods about the other guy (or gal) as the media is willing to pass on to the public as truth.
March 5: Louisiana
March 8: Alabama, Hawaii, Mississippi, Ohio
March 13: Puerto Rico
March 15: Illinois, Missouri
March 22: Arizona
APRIL 2016
April 5: Maryland, Washington DC, Wisconsin
April 26: Connecticut, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island
MAY 2016
Mar 3: Indiana
May 10: Nebraska, West Virginia
May 17: Kentucky, Oregon
May 24: Arkansas
JUNE 2016
June 7: Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, South Dakota, California
What do you think would happen if the schedule was turned on its head and the five states voting in June voted first? I know one thing, the candidates would like campaigning in the California & New Mexico sunshine a lot more than the January snow of Iowa and New Hampshire. And after all, don't we all want to make this ridiculous process easier on
Thursday, April 16, 2015
Republican Candidates and The Great Divide
"You know in your heart he's right. Far, far right."
In 1964, Barry Goldwater ran for president against Lyndon Johnson and got crushed. He was by standards of the mid-60s very conservative. One of his campaign slogans was: 'You know in your heart he's right.' The quote above is what the opposition did with that suggestion.
Now 50+ years later, we are coming to grips with a completely different kind of conservatism. Thus far, we have Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and Rand Paul with their hats tossed into the far right side of the presidential ring. However, we all know as the tiny car rolls to center stage, there are more clowns candidates set to leap into our collective consciousness.
Let me propose a project in tolerance, understanding and borderline insanity to my liberal friends. Independents, middle of the roaders, moderates and rational republicans might try this as well.
As each candidate makes their announcement, I have been taking a day or two to read the websites, columns, pundits and even their own presidential page to find out what they say they stand for. Without the filter of the "liberal media" the picture is much more clear.
Please note I am not saying you will find any of them more rational, sane, thoughtful or persuasive. What I will offer from my own first three forays into far right land is this: Following such a perusal of the candidate's support and supporters, you will have a much better understanding of who these people are. And by "these people" I do not mean the candidates themselves. I refer to those who support policies and rhetoric that you probably find personally offensive or downright insane.
This is a divided country. Severely, some say hopelessly, divided. I am finding this window into the "other" to be interesting, disappointing, educational and at times frightening. But it is where we are and ostrich behavior won't address the reality of this great divide.
Monday, January 12, 2015
For My Liberal Friends
I know how much my politically liberal friends are suffering these days. The 'new' congress is proposing all kinds of mean, nasty, conservative, evil, dastardly bills, laws and other treasonous acts.
Let me offer you just the tiniest bit of good news on the horizon. There are 34 congressional senate seats up for re-election in 2016. Of those, ten are rather secure seats for your guys and gals, plus a whole bunch of current republican held seats in blue or purple states. Additionally, you now get two whole years of crazy ass nonsense from an elephant run congress to stir up the electorate. Of course, you do still have that Hillary problem and the Koch brothers are already putting down payments on the election.
Oh well, good news -- bad news. Here's the list.
DEMOCRATS (10)
Michael Bennet (Colorado)
Richard Blumenthal (Connecticut)
Barbara Boxer (California) retiring in 2016
Patrick Leahy (Vermont)
Barbara Mikulski (Maryland)
Patty Murray (Washington)
Harry Reid (Nevada)
Brian Schatz (Hawaii)
Charles Schumer (New York)
Ron Wyden (Oregon)
Richard Blumenthal (Connecticut)
Barbara Boxer (California) retiring in 2016
Patrick Leahy (Vermont)
Barbara Mikulski (Maryland)
Patty Murray (Washington)
Harry Reid (Nevada)
Brian Schatz (Hawaii)
Charles Schumer (New York)
Ron Wyden (Oregon)
REPUBLICANS (24)
Kelly Ayotte (New Hampshire)
Roy Blunt (Missouri)
John Boozman (Arkansas)
Richard Burr (North Carolina)
Dan Coats (Indiana)
Mike Crapo (Idaho)
Chuck Grassley (Iowa)
John Hoeven (North Dakota)
Johnny Isakson (Georgia)
Ron Johnson (Wisconsin)
Mark Kirk (Illinois)
James Lankford (Oklahoma)
Mike Lee (Utah)
John McCain (Arizona)
Jerry Moran (Kansas)
Lisa Murkowski (Alaska)
Rand Paul (Kentucky)
Rob Portman (Ohio)
Marco Rubio (Florida)
Tim Scott (South Carolina)
Richard Shelby (Alabama)
John Thune (South Dakota)
Pat Toomey (Pennsylvania)
David Vitter (Louisiana)
Roy Blunt (Missouri)
John Boozman (Arkansas)
Richard Burr (North Carolina)
Dan Coats (Indiana)
Mike Crapo (Idaho)
Chuck Grassley (Iowa)
John Hoeven (North Dakota)
Johnny Isakson (Georgia)
Ron Johnson (Wisconsin)
Mark Kirk (Illinois)
James Lankford (Oklahoma)
Mike Lee (Utah)
John McCain (Arizona)
Jerry Moran (Kansas)
Lisa Murkowski (Alaska)
Rand Paul (Kentucky)
Rob Portman (Ohio)
Marco Rubio (Florida)
Tim Scott (South Carolina)
Richard Shelby (Alabama)
John Thune (South Dakota)
Pat Toomey (Pennsylvania)
David Vitter (Louisiana)
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)































