Polls

This is (apparently, so far) shaping up to be a political defeat for the unions, the Democrats, and Obama.

by

48% Back GOP Governor in Wisconsin Spat, 38% Side With Unions.

So far, it looks that way.

If these sorts of numbers hold up, the unions, the Democrats, and Mr. Obama will have managed to turn a local setback into a major defeat by accepting battle on a ground not of their own choosing.

(I wanted poll numbers, and I went to Patrick Ruffini’s Twitter stream, knowing if there were any, he’d have them.)

That poll is a national, not a Wisconsin poll.

What are the Wisconsin-only numbers? Last week Walker was apparently behind.

The question was:

As you may know, Gov. Scott Walker has proposed a plan to limit the pay of government workers and teachers, increase their share of the cost of benefits, and strip some public-employ unions of much of their power. We’d like to know if APPROVE or DISAPPROVE of Gov. Walker’s plan.

43% approved, 53% disapproved. But that was last week, the question is slanted, events have moved on and that is only one poll. (That same poll found that by 55/36 people wanted the Democrat senators to return to the capitol.)

I don’t see any other Wisconsin-only polls. If anyone knows of one please put a link in the comments.

It is too early to say how this will all play out.

The Great Unifier

by

To win wars, clean up oil spills, or define domestic policies, don’t we need to work together? Isn’t the president’s most important duty – the one that lies under all those others – to unify? I suspect that was the founders’ thoughts, since the presidency is the one post for which the entire country votes.

Sure, I saw enough of BDS to suspect Bush less culpable than his audience; I’m trying to be objective. And the leftist pundits are unhappy. Still, crazy as they are, they aren’t the thugs at polling booth doors – nor responsible for the large numbers at Tea Party rallies.

Surfing responses, I was struck by Luntz’s focus group: the more Obama talked the more reactions diverged; his audience became intensely argumentative. Some were attracted to populist rhetoric and others turned off by it.

My impression of past polls is despite a good-sized discrepancy on many issues, the lines were roughly parallel. The more knowledgeable might remark whether this divergence is common. Perhaps it isn’t a big deal. I hope not. We don’t need an increasingly polarized country. But though I would like us all to at least minimally get along and be more productive, that doesn’t mean I’m buying much if any of the goods Obama was selling last night.

Statistical Tie in Massachusetts?

by

Democrat pollsters PPP show Scott Brown one point ahead of Martha Coakley in the race for the now dead Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat.

As Michael Barone puts it: Wow.

This is still a long shot, but not, apparently, a forlorn hope.

(There is also a poll from the Boston Globe showing Coakley 15 points ahead. I believe the Globe, about anything, about as much as I believe the North Korean Communist Party’s official pronouncements. Rasmussen had Coakley ahead by 9 points on January 5, 2009, and there is no way she has picked up six points since then.)

I liked Brown’s TV ad, showing JFK’s tax cut message. Nicely done.

The fact that this race is even close shows that the Obama / Reid / Pelosi leadership is failing miserably for the Democrats.

I was in Massachusetts in 1980 when the state confounded everyone by voting for Reagan. I am hoping it surprises everyone again.

UPDATE: A friend wrote, expressing concern about vote fraud in this race. While I don’t discount this entirely, this was my response:

I am not so sure about massive fraud. Massachusetts is a funny
place. It is very liberal, but it has very civic minded populace, and
blatant Chicago style crooked elections don’t really happen there. I
grew up there and got to compare it to Chicago. Chicago does not come
off favorably. The race will also be closely scrutinized. I am not
sure how much of an issue that will be. If it was Illinois, you could
count on it.

UPDATE II: A friend out in Mass tells me she is seeing people holding signs for Brown, not seeing that for Coakley, and also way more Brown yard signs. This seems to show the energy level is with Brown, which is consistent with other things I am reading. She also pointed out something about Brown that I hadn’t thought of: He is like Obama seemed to be in 2008: “He’s also likable, handsome and different than usual.” Yes. Right. Obama ran against the status quo, and won. Brown is running against the status quo. He’ll probably lose, but he is making a real race out of it.

Funny. Brown as Obama 2.0 — returned to Earth as a Conservative.

Also: Good to see people sending money Brown’s way. The last few days will matter a lot, and money talks.

Bribes With Other People’s Money Aren’t Always That Attractive

by

We have our faults. We are tempted by power and money – that’s no less true of Americans than any other nation. But we aren’t fatalistic. We are pretty sure that God helps them that helps themselves. And we may covet but we don’t believe that is a sign of injustice but rather of sin. So, all in all, I’m feeling pretty good about us; Obama’s attempts at turning us on bankers or insurance companies or. . . Well, we haven’t been turning in anger or with our raised fists. The biggest movement of the last few months may be anti-tax, but it seems more an argument for standing on our own feet, for independence, for liberty. And if Ben Nelson can be bought, I can (with some pride) point out that Nebraskans can’t be. The poll isn’t some kind of middling, some kind of, well, we’re glad to get the money but it’s a nasty business. It’s I don’t want any of that tainted lucre.

It’s been a long time since I left, but one of my daughters is thinking of moving there. She’s the one with the “Sowell Bro'” t-shirt. I’m hoping she’ll be happy.