McCain Approval Drops Net 27 Points

It turns out turning hard to the right might not actually be great politics.

55% of voters disapprove of McCain to just 34% who give him good marks. When PPP polled Arizona in September he was at a positive 48/42 approval spread, so he's dropped 27 points on the margin since that time.

Looking into the internals (.pdf) of the poll, it's quite clear that John McCain's pandering to the hard right isn't really buying him any friends. Since the fall, McCain's approval rating among Republicans has fallen from 65 percent to 48 percent -- yet now more Arizonans overall view McCain as too conservative (35 percent) than too liberal (28 percent). Although McCain still leads in a head-to-head against Democratic Tucson city councilor Rodney Glassman, he is now under 50 percent despite the fact that the vast majority of Arizonans, like me, are unfamiliar with the Democratic candidate. How McCain manages to navigate this mess is yet unclear to me.

Sen. Schumer Leads Opposition to Citizens United V. FEC With New Proposal

As most of you probably know by now, Citizens United V. FEC was the biggest SCOTUS decision this year, and arguably for awhile.  The 5-4 decision supposedly ended a limit on corporations first amendment rights, according to some of the advocates for the decision. 

I personally enjoyed Slate writer Dahlia Lithwick's take on the decision, saying that it creates a "Pinnochio Project" in which the Court transforms "a corporation into a real live boy."

McCain-Feingold advocates most likely wanted to beat their heads against a wall once they caught wind of this decision, because it was a proverbial slap in the face.  

Public opinion of what currently stands is overwhelmingly negative. A Washington Post poll taken after the ruling this February showed 8 of 10 respondents were opposed with 65% of polltakers being “strongly opposed” to the ruling. There isn’t even much of a partisan divide when it comes to opposition of this ruling. Bipartisan opposition of this ruling continues, and Congressional Democrats have a lot on their plates when they try curtail some of what the ruling set in place.  

Democrats plan to introduce legislation next week that would sharply limit the ability of foreign-connected companies to participate in U.S. politics and require greater transparency from corporations, unions and nonprofit groups that pay for political advertising, according to a confidential summary of the bill.

Source: Washington Post

The legislation being proposed wouldn’t fully negate the decision made by the Supreme Court by any means. The crux of the bill would address would require greater transparency from corporation, unions, etc. who finance political advertising while limiting non-domestic companies participation in American elections. Other facets of the bill would include executives or group leaders to include their names on ads that they fund, much like McCain-Feingold’s “Stand by your ad” provision

According to the summary, obtained by The Washington Post, the legislation would require corporate chief executives or group leaders to publicly attach their names to ads, much like political candidates are required to do. It would also mandate disclosure of major donors whose money is used for "campaign-related activity."

Many Republicans are in opposition to the plan constructed by Schumer and Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD). <Insert collective gasp of disbelief here>  

Campaign finance reform, has been a controversial issue in American politics for a long time and will continue to be. The McCain-Feingold Act (Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act) was the first type of legislation in any form to amend/change the Federal Election Act of 1971.  The law was passed in 2002, meaning for 30 years the same election standards were in place. Even at that, Russ Feingold and John McCain had been working on getting this through Congress for almost 8 years.

The act faced opposition by everyone's favorite Senator, Mitch McConnell, and eventually led to a Supreme Court case.  McConnell V. FEC challenged the Constitutionality of McCain-Feingold.  

Schumer and crew hope they can rally some support from Republicans to help pass legislation for this, but only time will tell if that plan comes to fruition.

Weekly Diaspora: What the #$@!, Arizona?

by Erin Rosa, Media Consortium blogger

While federal lawmakers cautiously mull over the possibility of dropping a comprehensive immigration reform bill this year, legislators in Arizona have passed yet another law that criminalizes undocumented immigrants. What’s more, the Arizona House is advancing a bill that would require the Arizona Secretary of State to review President Barack Obama’s birth certificate before his name is allowed on any ballots.

The Arizona crackdown

Arizona lawmakers just passed the Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighbourhood Act, which is arguably the toughest immigration law in the country. It forces local police to check the immigration status of people if there is “reasonable suspicion” that they might be undocumented. The bill is an invitation to racially profile residents.

The bill, which now goes the states’ Republican Governor Jan Brewer for final approval, has sparked an organized campaign to defeat the measure over concerns that the bill is inhumane would discriminate against Latinos.

Valeria Fernández with the Inter Press Service reports on the bill, which “includes a number of provisions that go beyond authorizing the arrest of undocumented immigrants on ‘reasonable suspicion.’ It targets day laborers by making it a crime to look for work on the street, and would fine anyone who harbors or transports an undocumented immigrant, including family members.”

Outbreaks of civil disobedience have accompanied the bill. “On Tuesday, nine students were arrested on charges of disorderly conduct after they chained themselves to the entrance doors of the capitol building in an act of civil disobedience against the proposed law.” Fernández reports. “Authorities arrested them as soon as they said they wouldn’t leave until the governor took action on the law.”

John Tomasic with the Colorado Independent also notes that “On Capitol Hill, Prominent Latino Reps. Luis Gutierrez [(D-IL)] and Raul Grijalva [(D-AZ)]denounced Arizona’s controversial immigration bill and urged [Brewer] to veto the legislation. “

Eyes on Washington

While anti-immigrant legislation passes in Arizona, optimism for federal immigration reform this year is growing dimmer. While a proposal has already been introduced in the House of Representatives, the issue of citizenship for an estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants could be shelved indefinitely if a bill isn’t introduced in the Senate soon.

The Senate will need time to debate the issue, and if it isn’t introduced in the next few weeks, potential fallout from the upcoming Congressional elections may make passing reform even more difficult.

ALIPAC attacks

As Kai Wright notes over at RaceWire, the congressional debate is not off to a civil start. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), the only Republican Senator openly working on a bipartisan immigration reform bill, was verbally attacked by anti-immigrant groups this week.

“The rabidly anti-immigrant group Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC) has launched a campaign professing to out Graham as gay,” reports Wright. “In a speech to a Tea Party rally — which is making the web rounds via YouTube — the group’s leader, William Gheen, speculated that Graham’s being blackmailed into participating in immigration reform because of his ’secret.’ ‘I need to figure out why you’re trying to sell out your own countrymen and I need to make sure you being gay isn’t it,’ Gheen said.

McCain veers right

Mother Jones reports that ALIPAC is also targeting Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), a lawmaker who co-sponsored a immigration reform bill in 2007 with the late Ted Kennedy. The 2007 bill didn’t pass, and since then McCain has backed away from vocally supporting reform now that he’s facing a primary challenge to his Senate seat.

“The motivation for McCain’s rightward shift is obvious,” Suzy Khimm writes. “The Arizona senator authored the Senate’s last comprehensive reform bill, which included a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. His Tea Party-backed primary opponent, J.D. Hayworth, has attacked him relentlessly for doing so. Hayworth has been endorsed by [ALIPAC], a right wing anti-immigrant group that’s trying to stir up Tea Partiers to revive the conservative crusade against ‘amnesty.’”

Just this week, McCain introduced a bill in the Senate that would 3,000 National Guard troops to patrol the border, “an intervention that critics say would be both costly and ineffective,” according to Khimm. McCain also come out in support of Arizona’s news anti-immigration law.

But despite vicious attacks from the right, there is still hope. Immigration reform supporters are planning rallies in dozens of states on May 1 to keep pressure on the Senate to propose a bill. To organizers working on the ground to pass reform, Arizona exemplifies why the broken immigration system needs to be fixed on a national level, and now.

This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about immigration by members of The Media Consortium. It is free to reprint. Visit the Diaspora for a complete list of articles on immigration issues, or follow us on Twitter. And for the best progressive reporting on critical economy, environment, and health care issues, check out The Audit, The Mulch, and The Pulse . This is a project of The Media Consortium, a network of leading independent media outlets.

 

 

 

What Conventional Wisdom Doesn't Tell You

Several days after the 2008 presidential election, the New York Times produced a famous map of voting shifts since 2004.  Most politics buffs have seen this map; according to it, Appalachia “voted more Republican, while the rest of the nation shifted more Democratic.”

There is something else occurring here, however, which the map hides – and which almost nobody has perceived. This trend goes strongly, strongly against conventional wisdom.

To unearth this trend, let’s move back one election – to former Vice President Al Gore’s 2000 tie with former President George W. Bush. Here are the states he performed best relative to President Barack Obama. In all these, Mr. Gore did at least five percent better than Mr. Obama.

By and large, these states are what one would expect. All are located in the midst of Appalachia or the Deep South, regions rapidly trending Republican. All were fairly unenthused by Obama’s themes sounding change and hope.

Here are the remaining states in which Gore improved upon Obama:

This result is something quite different. Arizona – Senator John McCain’s home state – is not surprising, nor is Appalachian Kentucky.

Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New Jersey, on the other hand – these constitute core Democratic strongholds. The vast majority of pundits would characterize them as becoming more Democratic, if anything at all. Indeed, there has been much ballyhoo about the Northeast’s Democratic shift – how Republicanism is dead in the region, how every single New England congressman is a Democrat, how Obama lost only a single county in New England.

That Al Gore performed more strongly than Barack Obama in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New Jersey runs strongly against this hypothesis. Remember, too, that Obama won the popular vote by 7.3% while Gore did so by only 0.5%. If the two had ran evenly, this trend would have been far more pronounced. The state in which Obama improved least upon Gore, for instance, was not Alaska or Mississippi – but New York, where Gore did only 1.88% worse than Obama. The map below indicates this:

Much of the movement derives from the Republican candidates in 2000 and 2008. George Bush was a terrible fit for northeastern voters, with his lack of intellectual depth and cowboy persona. John McCain, on the other hand, was a man many northeasterners admired – he had a strong brand of independence and moderation, which the campaign tarnished but did not destroy. McCain was a person New England Republicans could feel comfortable voting for – and they did. (Fortunately for Democrats, there are not too many Republicans left in the Northeast.)

All in all, the Northeast’s relative movement right constitutes a very surprising trend. Few people would anticipate that Al Gore did better than Barack Obama in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New Jersey. It defies conventional wisdom and the common red-blue state dynamic, which holds that the northeast is permanently Democratic. Finally, given increasing political polarization, this relative trend the other way probably is a good thing for the country.

--Inoljt, http://mypolitikal.com/

 

 

Sarah Palin

Sarah Palin is heavily criticized and under attack for her support of John McCain in his primary battle against an ultra conservative opponent. This is her base, tea partyites and other right wingers turning against her.

Don't they recognize loyalty? John McCain plucked her from obscurity, making her his VP nominee and opening new horizons for her. She is right to stick with the guy she came in with.

SarahPalin is smart, or has very smart advisers. Resigning from office, writing a book, and giving speeches has brought her more fame and a small fortune. For her, it was the right move at the right time.

homer  www.altara.blogspot.com

 

Diaries

Advertise Blogads