Future Voting Demographics

Michael Barone posted an article at National Review today analyzing the various voting groups that make up the American electorate and the changes they are going through.

This is the House of Representatives map from the National Journal:

HouseofRepMapIn his article at the National Review, Michael Barone describes this map:

It looks almost entirely red, except for some pinpoints of blue in major metropolitan areas and a few blue blotches here and there — in Minnesota, northern New Mexico and Arizona, western New England, along the Pacific Coast.

Mr. Barone points out that the map is actually misleading–the population density in the blue areas is generally much greater than in the red areas.

The article at National Review explains:

But it (the map) does tell us something about the geographic and cultural isolation of the core groups of the Democratic party: gentry liberals and blacks.

These were the two groups gathered together when Barack Obama had the opportunity to draw the new lines of his state senate district after the 2000 census. He combined the heavily black South Side of Chicago with Gold Coast gentry liberals north of the Loop.

Together, they provided him with an overwhelmingly Democratic voter base and with access to the upper financial and intellectual reaches of the Democratic party — and, in short time, the presidency of the United States.

The article at National Review explains that the number of black voters in 2014 was only slightly down from 2012–from 13 percent of voters to 12 percent of voters (that is not unusual in a mid-term election). However, blacks are not a growing segment of the voting population, and Democrats will probably never again win the 91 percent of the black vote they won in 2008.

The percentage of Hispanic voters is rising, but they are not guaranteed Democrat voters–some of the key issues of the Democrats have alienated the Hispanic vote–abortion, gun control, and opposition to fracking. So the Democrats cannot automatically count on those votes in the future (this might explain the Democrats focus on legalizing illegal aliens).

The article at National Review concludes:

Analysts who separate Americans into two tidy categories — white and non-white — assume that the non-white category will grow and that whites can’t vote any more Republican than they have historically. Presto, a Democratic America.

The first assumption is well founded. But Hispanics and Asians are not replicating blacks’ voting behavior, just as they haven’t shared their unique historic heritage. In some states, they’re voting more like whites than like blacks.

The second assumption may not be true at all. History shows that self-conscious minorities tend to vote cohesively, as blacks have for 150 years and southern whites did for 90. It’s an understandable response to feeling outnumbered and faced with an unappealing agenda.

In that case, Romney’s 59 percent or House Republicans’ 60 percent among whites may turn out to be more a floor than a ceiling. And that map may become increasingly familiar.

2016 will be an interesting year–the Presidential campaign has already begun. Who should we watch? On the Democrat side, keep your eye on Elizabeth Warren. On the Republican side, keep your eye on the governors–Scott Walker, Bobby Jindal, John Thune, and the Senators, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Rob Portman.

Intimidating The Press

Yesterday Peter Wehner at Commentary posted an article about the recent dust-up between President Obama’s White House and the press. He cites an article in the National Journal posted on Thursday and written by Ron Fournier. Mr. Fournier details some of his encounters with an official in the Obama White House.

The article at National Journal reports:

As editor-in-chief of National Journal, I received several e-mails and telephone calls from this White House official filled with vulgarity, abusive language, and virtually the same phrase that Politico characterized as a veiled threat. “You will regret staking out that claim,” The Washington Post reporter was told.

Once I moved back to daily reporting this year, the badgering intensified. I wrote Saturday night, asking the official to stop e-mailing me. The official wrote, challenging Woodward and my tweet. “Get off your high horse and assess the facts, Ron,” the official wrote.

Mr. Fournier responded with the following:

“I asked you to stop e-mailing me. All future e-mails from you will be on the record — publishable at my discretion and directly attributed to you. My cell-phone number is … . If you should decide you have anything constructive to share, you can try to reach me by phone. All of our conversations will also be on the record, publishable at my discretion and directly attributed to you.”

He has not heard from the official since. Cockroaches scatter when you turn on the light.

Mr. Fournier concludes at the end of his article:

This can’t be what Obama wants. He must not know how thin-skinned and close-minded his staff can be to criticism.

Peter Wehner at Commentary has a different conclusion:

I actually believe this conduct can be what Mr. Obama wants. He is himself quite thin-skinned and closed-minded, so it makes perfect sense for his staff to be as well. And while the press coverage they get often ranges from favorable to fawning, it is never good enough for them. The job of intimidation is a full-time one, after all, and it clearly works with some journalists.

One of the extraordinary talents the president has is projecting an image of decency and civility while giving home to staffers who are known for being abusive and threatening.

It’s perfectly appropriate to judge a president by his White House staff. And Ron Fournier has done us the favor of lifting the curtain, just a bit, on this one.

I truly believe that we currently have a White House full of Chicago thugs.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Here Come The Regulations

The National Journal posted an article on Thursday about increased regulations under the Obama Administration. The article noted that during the first two years of President Obama’s term there were more regulations than normal. In 2012, the number of regulations decreased as regulations became a campaign issue.

The article reports:

Federal agencies are sitting on a pile of major health, environmental, and financial regulations that lobbyists, congressional staffers, and former administration officials say are being held back to avoid providing ammunition to Mitt Romney and other Republican critics.

The article posted a chart to illustrate how Washington plays the regulations game: Unfortunately, I cannot figure out how to post it here, so please follow the link to the article to view the chart. The bottom line is simple–the regulations game is played by both parties.

The article reports:

Among the most politically controversial rules is one that would slash toxic tailpipe pollution from gasoline, but that could also slightly increase costs at the pump. That rule, say industry lobbyists and environmentalists who work closely with EPA, has been sitting at the agency, ready to roll out, for nearly a year. But the White House was reluctant to regulate gasoline in an election year in which pain at the pump has ignited fierce firestorms.

“There are at least a half-dozen other examples like that throughout the agency,” said William Becker, executive director for the National Association of Clean Air Agencies. “And that’s why administrations will do everything they can to avoid putting these rules out during an election year. But all that ends after the election. Then it’s a mad rush to see who gets the rules out the door first.”

Before you vote, please consider this report, and please remember President Obama’s statement to Russian President Medvedev that he would be more flexible in dealing with the Russians in a second term. I sincerely believe that a second term of President Obama will destroy America as we have known it.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Some Major West Virginia Democrats Will Not Attend The Democrat National Convention

The National Journal reported yesterday that West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin, Representative Nick Rahall and Governor Earl Ray Tomblin will not be part of the West Virginia delegation to the Democrat Convention in Charlotte in September.

The article reports:

“I intend to spend this fall focused on the people of West Virginia, whether that’s representing them in my official U.S. Senate duties or here at home, where I can hear about their concerns and ideas to solve the problems of this great nation,” Manchin said in a statement. “I will remain focused on bringing people together for the next generation, not the next election.”

President Obama’s policies toward coal are very damaging to West Virginia, which has an economy based on coal production.

As Breitbart.com reported earlier this month:

President Obama wants to steer electricity generation away from coal to natural gas. The only problem with that is our system is set up for coal, coal is abundant and coal is easier to get. While the market may naturally gravitate to natural gas as it becomes easier to get through fracking, something the Left has demonized and is fighting, we’re not there yet.

This is a definite threat to the economy of West Virginia, and the leaders of West Virginia are correct in taking that threat seriously. Part of their responsibility as state officials is to protect the welfare of their state. It is totally understandable that the leaders of West Virginia will not be at the Democrat Conventions. It is also interesting to read the comments at the bottom of the article at the National Journal. It is also a good idea when you read comments on news articles that campaigns have people whose only job is to comment on articles that mention some aspect of the campaign.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Does This Mean I Can Leave My Shoes On ?

Yesterday the Weekly Standard posted an article about a rather amazing statement made by senior official in the State Department.

The article reports:

The war on terror is over,” a senior official in the State Department official tells the National Journal. “Now that we have killed most of al Qaida, now that people have come to see legitimate means of expression, people who once might have gone into al Qaida see an opportunity for a legitimate Islamism.” 

Evidently, the theory behind the statement is the belief that the Arab Spring has changed things. The Obama Administration sees the need to cultivate positive relationships with the Muslim Brotherhood and other ‘moderate’ Muslim groups. That’s a really interesting idea considering that the stated goal of the Muslim Brotherhood is a worldwide caliphate achieved by overthrowing western governments either by force or subversion. (google: Holy Land Foundation Case documents)

I understand that the State Department wants to make friends with everyone. That is an admirable goal, but how wise is it to attempt to cuddle a rattlesnake? The war on terror is not over. Unfortunately, those who seek to do us harm are still out there planning. Are we planning defense?

The article concludes:

This new outlook is radically different than what was expressed under President George W. Bush immediately after September 11, 2001. “Over time it’s going to be important for nations to know they will be held accountable for inactivity,” Bush said on November 6, 2001. “You’re either with us or against us in the fight against terror.

For President Barack Obama, it would seem, one can be both with us and against us–or not with us, but not quite against us. 

We shouldn’t forget the need to protect our country. I’m not sure that President Obama understands that concept.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Part Of Being An Adult Is Taking Responsibility For Your Actions

All of us remember the days of our youth when we could blame our siblings for things we did. There was also ‘the dog ate my homework.’ But as we grew, we learned to tell the truth and face the consequences of our actions. Well, not all of us learned that lesson.

The National Journal reported today that President Obama has rejected the construction of the Keystone Pipeline. He has also blamed the Republicans for that rejection–it was their fault because ‘ the 60-day deadline imposed by Republicans did not allow adequate time to review an alternate route through an ecologically sensitive area in Nebraska.’ Does anyone actually believe that he would have approved the pipeline if he had been given more time?

A spokesman for Speaker of the House John Boehner made the following statement:

“President Obama is about to destroy tens of thousands of American jobs and sell American energy security to the Chinese,” said Brendan Buck. “The president won’t stand up to his political base even to create American jobs. This is not the end of this fight.”

I hope that is true. Congress needs to override this decision. The future security of America and American energy depends on it.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Dinosaur Perspective

I grew up in the 50’s and 60’s, so I have very little understanding of how dating works today and how relationships work today. The latest accusation against Herman Cain frankly leaves me somewhat confused.

First of all, why is Gloria Allred involved? The history of this lawyer in terms of going after Republican candidates is well known. It seems odd to me that she would be involved in this situation where there is not an actual lawsuit or monetary settlement involved.

Secondly, according to a website called National Journal:

“He reached over and he put his hand on my leg under my skirt and reached for my genitals,” Bialek said, her voice breaking with emotion. “He also grabbed my head and brought it towards his crotch. I was very, very surprised and very shocked. I said, ‘What are you doing? You know I have a boyfriend. This isn’t what I came here for.’”

She said that Cain responded, “You want a job, right?” Bialek said she asked him to stop, and Cain complied. She then asked to be driven back to her hotel, and she said Cain promptly complied with that request as well.

This sounds more like a really bad date than a legal matter. I also find it very interesting that the woman involved lives in Chicago.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta