Not So Bold Prediction - Proposition 30 Will Fail

I have been watching California propositions for a very long time.  (I am a political junkie that first got interested in the politics of Barry Goldwater around age 7, I am not kidding.)  I don't have to do much research to know that Jerry Brown's tax hike initiative is going to tank.  First, there is a competing worser initiative on the ballot, Molly Munger's proposition 38.  Voters get nervous when they see two broad based tax increases.  Second, true to form, support is tanking at the last minute, even if the proposition is still leading.  Here is a picture of the support over time from Pepperdine University's School of Public Policy:

They latest numbers have support now at 49.2%.  In my experience, tax increases never garner last minute increases, and always tend to underperform at the polls.  Maybe its because some people are afraid to the pollsters that they are against good schools, or some other lofty promise, but get in the polling booth and think about how the tax increase will make everything more expensive.  Maybe they just get around to reading the fine print, like the across the board sales tax increase.  Who knows? I just know that this is the point at which supporters and opponents start conceding the tax hike is going to lose.  Here is Teacher's Union spokesperson Dan Wells, as quoted in Annenberg Digital News (of USC) on why they spent so much against Proposition 32, and therefor hinting that's why Prop 30 will fail:

“Proposition 30 and Proposition 32 are both important, but for the long range implications on the political landscape in California, 32 is going to have huge repercussions, whereas 30 is more dedicated specifically to education at this point,” said Wells.  

Wells emphasized that while both fronts are important, opposing Proposition 32 has more implications for the quality of education in the long-run. He explained that Proposition 32 would bar unions from fighting for measures like Proposition 30 in the first place.  

“As far as we’re concerned, Proposition 32 is the whole ball game,” he added.

Maybe he's right, but he sounds like he's preparing the post-election spin.

Other polling paints an even bleaker picture for the measure.  From the LATimes:

Support has plunged for Proposition 30, Gov. Jerry Brown's plan to raise billions of dollars in taxes, a new USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll shows, with less than half of voters planning to cast ballots in favor of the measure.

Only 46% of registered voters now support Brown's initiative, a 9-point drop over the last month, and 42% oppose it. The findings follow a lackluster month of campaigning by the governor, who had spent little time on the stump and found himself fighting off attacks from backers of a separate ballot measure that would raise taxes for schools.

This was a poll of registered voters, and likely voters are going to be more conservative.  I wonder how Jerry Brown will threaten voters next?

Quote of the Day

Comes from one of my favorite writers of the California political scene, Chris Reed.  His CalWatchdog web site is a must read for keeping track of Sacramento political shenanigans.  He turns his attention on the Bilbray-Peters race in today's column.  (H/T Dawn)

Democratic challenger Scott Peters, however, is a piece of work — a very well-educated lawyer who tried to blame his central role in San Diego’s pension crisis on the bad advice of his staff. Peters stands for nothing but careerism. The next strong stand he takes will be his first.

To be fair, Reed goes on to lambaste Bilbray for using his cancer stricken daughter in TV ads.

Obama Supporters Against Obama's Policies

H/T from Judge Napolitano, here are some person on the street interviews from Obama supporters and what they think of Obama's policies.




Obama has sold out his supporters, clearly. The anti-war left has been effectively neutered.

Democrats Against Obama

I ask Democrats to pause a moment and think about what their support for Obama means for their party.  While everyone gets some partisan fever at this time in the election cycle, I think that Democrats have a lot to lose with Obama's re-election.  Here are a few key issues.

• ACA.  The Affordable Care Act will continue to be an albatross around the Democratic party's collective neck. Time will reveal all of the sops to big insurance and big pharma that went into the bill.  It will eat into the party's desired reputation as being against the excesses of big business.  When your party is seen as the party of both Big Business and Big Government you are toast.  Look at the 2006 Congressional elections and what happened to Republicans.  Opinion polls had shifted and found the GOP to be seen as the party of big government in polls and they got shellacked.
• ACA. Again, because you know in your heart that countless regulations embedded in the law will drive up the cost of health care and tarnish government with the same heartless image that is now enjoyed by the insurance companies.  Being tied to the eventual demise of quality health care is not in the Democratic party's best interest.  You would be better served by a repeal, after which you could propose a much simpler bill that prevented discrimination due to pre-existing conditions, guaranteed portability and subsidized insurance for those above the poverty line but still in lower income brackets.  Even though I don't agree with this platform, it is guaranteed to be more popular than the ACA.  
• Kill lists, drone hits, never ending involvement in overseas wars.  Obama has sucked all the oxygen out of your heartfelt desire to be anti-war.  But how can the Democrats do so when they have a President that is continuing huge portions of the Bush foreign policy.  In fact, the Obama National Security Strategy could almost have been written by Rumsfeld.  
• Immigration.  There is no way that Obama will get comprehensive immigration reform passed until he makes a full commitment to securing the borders. Democrats may not care much for doing so, or they might; but they should understand that comprehensive reform will get impassioned opposition until the border with Mexico is secured.  Electing Romney makes it far more likely that a deal can be cut. 
• National debt.  Obama cares nothing for solving the national debt crisis.  He has ignored the issue and failed to put forward a budget.  Four more years of failing to deal with the problem will inevitably result in a crisis for the country.  I don't know what exact form the crisis will take; but the world is too interdependent but with multiple flashpoints of instability for there not to be a crisis.  A debt crisis that puts the nation into an economic tailspin like the Great Depression will have the same effect on the Democratic party as the Crash of 1929 did for the Republicans.  In wasn't until the 1980s, that the Republican party really recovered fully from the blame it took for the Depression.  I don't think Democrats really want to look forward to that.
• National debt, again.  The national debt is also likely to wreck the cherished entitlement programs the Democrats hold sacrosanct.  The math is inexorable.  Four more years of neglect by Obama will only make the math harder.  If you want to save Social Security and Medicare, some real work on reform better start soon; and it isn't going to happen on Obama's watch.  Personally, I think these programs are outdated and out to fail, but if you care about them, better to have a President that understands the math of the budget deficit.

Democrats are playing with fire in ignoring these issues; better off regrouping after an Obama defeat than letting him ruin your party for a generation.

Weekend Music Chill

Thinking about the administration's explanation about Benghazi led to this weekend's musical selection.  Also, I have been listening to a lot more 60s music because of watching Mad Men.

Here is a little more from the Rolling Stones.

Odds and Ends

I've been absent from blogging for a few days due to homework and regular work.  Tonight the Obama ad about #MyFirstTime, a double entendre about voting and, well you know what, is lighting up Twitter.  Since this has been so well covered elsewhere, I will only note that Foreign Policy noted the similarity to a Putin campaign ad.  Anyone up for more cult of personality?  In general, I can't believe how un-Presidential Obama appears.  Using coarse language to describe Romney, calling him a liar and worse.  His last debate performance wasn't a win.  When Romney told Obama that attacking him didn't explain his foreign policy, he was right on the mark.

Lots of good news in various polls.  Nationally, Romney 50, Obama 47 was repeated by three independent polls today.  Statewide, Proposition 30 has dropped below 50% support to 48%, with 44% opposed.  I have watched tax propositions in California for a long time and this has the stench of defeat. The even more odious Molly Munger super-humongous tax hike is at 39%.  Locally, Carl DeMaio is leading Bob Filner by 10 points, 46% to 36%.  There are still a lot of undecideds, and many of them are Democrats, but its hard to see them breaking by 4 to 1 for Filner at this stage of the race.  For a great break down on the polling in the mayor's race, click here.

Nate Silver, who had a great track record in 2008, partly due to access to internal Obama polling data, continues to give Obama a high chance of winning the election, 70% today.  His prediction, as far as I can tell is based on state polling, especially in Ohio.  But the national polls tell a different story.  My personal opinion is that the swing state polls will catch up with the national polls.  Ohio is always within 1.5% of the national average and usually trends ever so slightly more Republican.  Too think that Romney could win nationally by 2% but lose Ohio seems preposterous.

Meanwhile, the NY Times is reporting that intelligence officials from several nations agree that Iran is close to having a nuclear enrichment plant.  It is now a race against time for a regime that is deeply unpopular but rules as a military dictatorship.  Will they collapse before they get the bomb?  The administration has done about what they should have with Iran; but their public relations about it have been a disaster and will limit their future scope of action.  Admitting to U.S. involvement in the Stuxnet worm was the worst possible mistake and we are already paying the price.

What other crises face a future President-elect Romney? Fiscal cliff over sequestration and expiring tax cuts.  A fresh round of Euro currency crises.  Israeli pre-emption with Iran.  Would you really rather have Obama facing these crises?

Mitt Romney's Best Moment

Romney is clearly the alpha male, here, and you can tell that Obama is annoyed and it seems like he turns to the moderator for a bailout.  That might be unfair, but the President is clearly highly annoyed, even though he is being quoted accurately.

Sunshine On His Face - Romney Wins the Debate

Years ago, before Chris Matthews lost his mind, he was a fairly decent political analyst.  I remember his analysis about why one candidate or another might be favored to win the Presidency.  It was simple, he said, which candidate do you imagine as the one with the sunshine on his face?  That candidate will win.  He was thinking of Ronald Reagan, of course, but the opposite also applied.  Gloomy Guses such as Dukakis, Mondale and Dole were doomed in this analysis.  I didn't watch all of tonight's debate because of work related matters; and some of what I watched, I could only hear the tone and watch the body language of the candidates.  Romney clearly won the sunshine contest and therefore the debate.  Obama's facial expressions appeared abnormal, he seemed a bit hunched over; Romney looked happy and confident, like the lucky and blessed man that he is.  Americans may love an underdog, but they don't love a hangdog.

Obama interrupted, appeared petulant and attacked Romney when serious answer was called for.  He seemed the challenger, and not equal to the task.  I haven't looked at any polls, but I am certain this debate will help Romney in the polls. He severely wrong-footed Obama again, this time with a smooth, non-combative performance that hit Obama in ways he didn't appear to expect.  The President, fighting the last debate, appeared combative and personal when the subject matter and the setting didn't call for it.

Now I'll go check the spin.

Dead Heat? Then Advantage is to Romney

Forget spread in the polls and look at Obama's numbers.  The RealClearPolitics average shows Obama and Romney in a tie, in other words, the spread between the two is negligible. So here are the poll numbers for surveys ending on October 20:

NBC/WSJ
Obama 47, Romney 47

Rasmussen
Obama 47, Romney 49

Gallup
Obama 45, Romney 52

IBD/TIPP Tracking
Obama 48, Romney 42

If you focused on the the spread between the two, you would see a dead heat.  I don't believe that's the correct reading of these polls.  This is a race with an incumbent, and regardless of the vast swing in the numbers for Romney, Obama's numbers are packed in a tight range, averaging 46.8%. (The RCP rolling average is 47.1%, not statistically different.) This is very bad news for the President, because he is the known quantity in the race and he can't break the 49.5% or so he will need to win the election.  Further, these polls are lagging indicators, but the trend line towards Romney is significant.

Many might object that the election is not based on the popular vote, but the electoral vote.  True enough, but they seldom diverge by much.  In the electoral college the race seems to be coming down to Ohio, where Obama has maintained an advantage to date; with one recent poll calling it tied and a mainly Democrat polling firm showing Obama up by one.  If Ohio follows a national trend, and the trend follows past experience of breaking to the challenger, I would predict a slim Romney victory.  The conventional wisdom has not caught up with this and tomorrow's debate could of course change things.  Intrade odds still sitting around 60% for Obama.  However, the Intrade odds are heavily influenced by the available polling data, which might be lagging.  In 2008, the betting site got 48 states right, but the two that bettors missed were Indiana and Missouri.  In an election that might easily come down to one close state wrong, getting that one state wrong, that would also mean the site gets the election wrong.  Right now, Intrade odds are at about 58% for Obama to win Ohio; so we see a strong correlation with the national odds.  I am not sure why the CW hasn't caught up; but it doesn't matter yet.  The race is tight and the debates are making a difference and there is one to go.

Nate Silver does something called a nowcast, where he has the popular vote at 49.9 to 48.9 favoring Obama.  My nowcast, given past behavior breaking of voters breaking for the challenger, has Romney winning the popular vote 50.5 to 48.5 with one percent going to other candidates.

Obama Store Going Out of Business Sale

How else can I interpet this?  I got an email today from the Obama campaign with the subject line:

★ Our biggest sale EVER ★

And the following graphic:

Looks bad to me.  (No I am not going to link to their web site.)

A Plescia Campaign Volunteer Stopped by my House

This evening, Justin, a student at Point Loma Nazarene, stopped by my house, to talk to me about George Plescia's campaign for the state senate.  My eldest son answered the door, but immediately called for me to take the visit; since Justin was asking about putting up a yard sign.  I liked that the first thing he did was ask me what my concerns about California state government were.  I responded that the budget was a mess and that out of control state employee pensions were a big factor.  Justin vouched the Plescia felt the same way; that his candidate was in favor of a Proposition B type reform for state pensions as part of the solution.  He also said that if Plescia isn't elected the Democrats will have such a large majority that they will be able to pass any spending they want.  (I didn't think to disagree, he's right, except for the inevitable math problem when they run out of other people's money.)  He also pointed out that Plescia has created jobs in the private sector, much like Mitt Romney.

He also said that Plescia will work to get the "high speed rail to nowhere" put back to the voters for another vote, since it doesn't at all reflect what we voted on previously.  In Justin's opinion, echoing that of his candidate, it is ludicrous to think that a rail line from Los Angeles to the Central Valley will pay for itself and fund an extension to San Francisco.  I wasn't even aware that such an argument was being made.  (A review of the official plan reveals that only two "useable segment" are currently authorized, see below.)

We also talked a little about Bilbray; Justin didn't think he made conservatives happy, but felt that in this district, he was the best we could hope for in a Republican.  I wasn't so sure, but told him I am fully supporting Bilbray this cycle, but would be looking for a conservative to challenge him in the 2014 primary.  Justin mention the recent U-T poll that has Bilbray up 9 points.  I voiced my concern that it seems like a lot of the undecideds are Democrats who might break for Peters.  Justin offered that many of the Democrats who are undecided are environmentalists who were unhappy with the way he beat Saldana, and over something else that I didn't catch.  I hope so, Peters and anyone else involved with the San Diego pension fiascos should never win another election.

Justin said that he leads the San Diego students for Romney organization in addition to his work for George Plescia.  Justin was very impressive and knowledgeable, it was great for have him stop by.  And I signed up for a yard sign, to go with my Carl DeMaio sign.  You can sign up for one here.


"Useable segments" for high speed rail from State Law, California Resolution #HSRA11-22.

• The portion of the Phase 1 corridor (described in Streets and Highways Code 2704.04, subdivision (b)(2)) between and including a San Jose station and a Bakersfield station; and
• The portion of the Phase 1 corridor between and including a Merced station and a San Fernando Valley station.

Weekend Music Chill

Continuing my search for more modern music; I came across the band Guster and this number from 2010, Do You Love Me?



They really remind me of the Beatles, both in the style of the video and musically. What do you think. Here is the Fab Four with Got to Get You Into My Life.




I don't normally listen to the Beatles; perhaps a mistake on my part. I always love rock that makes good use of horns.

San Diego Mayoral Race - Why Would It Be Close?

The U-T is reporting that the issue of workers pensions is roiling the mayoral race.  Read this quote about Filner:

Filner, 70, has long been a champion for public employee unions which have been major donors to his campaigns over the past two decades. He opposed Proposition B ahead of the public vote, calling it a fraud that unjustly threw employees under the bus for the sins of past administrations.

As a taxpayer, I don't understand why Filner's candidacy isn't dead on arrival.  Ultimately, as a taxpayer, I am one of the employers who pay the city workers wages.  I want the best deal for my money.  It's as if a candidate for CEO of Ralph's touted his credentials for getting big pay raises for the unionized work force.  What board of directors in their right mind would hire such a person.  Yet here is Filner, supposedly in a tight race, telling voters that his support for unions should make us vote for him.  Sorry, but I want a tough negotiator who will cut the best deal for me.  This is why I am supporting Carl DeMaio for mayor.

DeMaio fought hard against the half cent sales tax increase, Proposition D.  He fought hard to bring pensions under control with Proposition B.  Despite what he says, I guarantee that Filner will undermine the city attorney's legal case on Prop B in order to get it off the books.  We can't trust Filner to fully support a law he so adamantly opposed.  I expect him to pull a stunt like Obama on the DOMA, where the executive abdicates his duty to argue the law to the Supreme Court.

Disappointed over Debate - UPDATE

The debate tonight appears to be headed towards a draw.  Obama is ready and making the points he needs to and so is Romney.  Obama will just keep on lying about Romney and his own record, and its hard to call him out in this format.  I can see why Romney got angry, because of the blatant lying, even if it didn't make him look great.  But how do we hold the President accountable?  Very tough in this format.  Obama is right now lying about the numbers regarding Romney's spending numbers, so what the heck?

UPDATE

After watching more of the debate, I think Romney won on points.  I also think that the extent of Obama's lies and his lying about Romney will come out.  Lastly, Obama gave up his key strength, likeability.  I think that he and Romney were equally obnoxious, but Romney had an excuse, disgust over being lied about.  In the end Obama doesn't win over the undecideds with this performance and they break to Romney.  I am still disappointed over the tenor of the debate, but I still believe that Romney will make more gains from this.

Why Did Ambassador Stevens Really Die?

I highly recommend the blog post from fellow SLOB, DooDooEconomics, on the killing of Ambassador Christopher Stevens.  Especially in light of Hillary Clinton's the buck stops here comments; we should ponder the real truth of why Al Qaeda was able to kill an American ambassador.  A couple of key facts.

The attack happened in Benghazi as the Ambassador was working to collect military grade weapons distributed under order of President Barack Obama. 

Kind of like Fast & Furious, as the blog points out.

Further, the prime suspect in the murder of Ambassador Stevens and the former Navy Seals was a terrorist released from an Egyptian prison.

Finally, and the part of the story that should result in Obama's defeat, were it not for a complicit media:

In order to ensure that American-made weapons were not found at the destroyed Benghazi consulate, the Obama administration delayed investigations by floating a cover story about a nonexistent protest due to an anti-Islamic video.

Please read the whole article.

My Tea Party California Proposition Ballot Recommendations

Voting by mail has started and as promised, I have put my recommendations for the ballot propositions in one post.  I consider myself a tea partyer, but the tea party is not an official organization, so my recommendations are my own.  I reviewed recommendations from Temple of Mut, LeftCoastRebel, Richard Rider and Ballotpedia as part of research for these recommendations.

Proposition 30. Jerry Brown's Tax Increase. NO
The California Teacher's Association is by far the biggest donor to this initiative, which is all we need to know to vote against it, as they are the nexus of evil, the very nadir to all that is good in politics in this state (and their ain't much good.)  Brown is hinting at horrible outcomes, like closing schools, if this initiative doesn't pass.  Since it won't, I hope he makes good.  One argument in favor is a bald face lie, that only the rich will pay, because this increases sales taxes that the poor pay.  California's schools are terrible, and not for lack of funding. SLOB consensus is also NO.

Proposition 31. Two Year Budget Cycle. YES
This is not a perfect proposition, but it's not all bad.  It reforms some of the state budget processes and shifts some revenue to local government while taking it away from Sacramento and gives local government some tools to fight unfunded mandates.  I don't like the two year cycle, which will be used by the legislature to cook the books, even worse.  The question is how much worse could it get?   That's a judgement call and call me a cock-eyed optimist, but I don't think the legislature and the governor could screw things up any more than they have done to date. SLOB consensus is mixed.

Proposition 32. Paycheck Protection Initiative. YES
I am not a fan of banning contributions to political campaigns by classes of organizations, but restrictions on corporations are already in place.  This proposition prohibits corporations and unions from donating directly to political campaigns with money collected from employee payroll deductions.  In general, this is a good idea, but the unions hate it.  Once again, the CTA is the biggest donor fighting this proposition.  This has a chance of becoming somewhat of a Wisconsin style reform that turns the tide against union control of state government.  SLOB consensus is YES.

Proposition 33. Some Technical Changes to Auto Insurance. YES
I can barely bring myself to care, since insurance companies shouldn't be subject to this kind of micro-management of their policies in the first place.  The changes make sense because they give the insurers some more options to reward good behavior and give military a chance to retain favored treatment if their coverage lapses due to deployment.  SLOB consensus is YES.

Proposition 34. Death Penalty Repeal. YES
I will state upfront that I am out of synch with many tea partyers on this one.  I feel deeply and passionately that the death penalty should be repealed.  Even though some crimes are so heinous as to deserve death, it is not good for our society to suffer that any should die with the acquiescence or action of the government.  I oppose abortion, euthanasia and the ACA on the same basis.  Some quotes from a previous post on the subject:

The tea party is nothing if not skeptical of government. Yet through the death penalty, we entrust to government the ultimate power of deciding the life or death of American citizens. I do not trust that our institutions of justice can apply the penalty fairly or without error. The thought of a man (and it is usually men) who would be wrongfully put to death is too horrible to contemplate. Yet, we have any number of cases where those on death row have been exonerated. My skepticism of government leads me to conclude that it cannot be trusted with a task such as deciding life and death, even of criminals.

SLOBs consensus is NO.

Proposition 35. Human Trafficking. NO
Human traffickers are the scum of the earth, but there are plenty of laws that already provide punishment.  I oppose any law that subverts the rule of law enshrined in the constitution.  This law limits defendants rights to cross-examination and could taint those not connected to the crime of trafficking.  Temple of Mut points out that the costs of enforcement are probably wildly underestimated.  SLOB consensus is mixed.


Proposition 36. Limits on Three Strikes Law. YES
I was never a big fan of the three strikes law, but I was more angry at career criminals being returned to the streets, so I supported that effort.  This is a reasonable attempt to reign in some of the absurd outcomes that have come out of that law.  It imposes the third strike life sentence only when the offense is violent or involved sex, drug or weapons related charges.  That seems sensible to me; the prisons are already overcrowded, I would only like to ensure that violent felons are in prison for life.  This is a management trade-off, given limited resources.  SLOB consensus is mixed, but leaning no.

Proposition 37. Mandatory Labeling - Genetic Engineered Food. NO
I don't need to do much research to know that this is more busybody legislation that will only drive up the price of food with compliance costs for agriculture and business.  Man has been genetically altering food since we planted the first crops millenia ago, all that has changed are the specific methods.  LeftCoastRebel points out that some genetic engineering reduces the need for pesticides, so shouldn't the greenies be for that?  Of course not, they only want to appear to help the environment as they tighten their grubby little socialist paws in a stranglehold on the economy.  SLOB consensus is a resounding NO.

Proposition 38. Molly Munger's Even Worser Tax Increase. NO
Since Governor Brown isn't really left wing enough to appease the California left, we actually need higher taxes than he is proposing in Proposition 30, according to the authors of this little gem.  Not content to raise taxes on "the rich," this proposition would raise taxes on most everyone.  SLOB consensus is NO.  By the way, I am happy to see two tax hikes on the ballot.  Conventional wisdom, supported by research says this makes it more likely that both will be defeated, see Ballotpedia.

Proposition 39. Complicating the CA Tax Code Further to Drive More Business Away. NO
I only had to read this line to know I would be opposing this measure: "Initially, this extra revenue would fund green energy projects, construction projects, public schools, and boost the state’s general fund."  Our very own Solyndra, funded by making life hell for businesses that have a partial presence in California.  How special.

Proposition 40. Confusing Measure Regarding State Senate Districts. NO
Here is a case where yes appears to mean no.  Voting for this measure would affirm the State Senate districts and No would overturn them.  Chris Reed documented the underhanded way in which these districts were drawn.  The question is whether overturning and letting the legislature or some other body redraw them is worth the effort.  Also, weighing on this vote is the fact that the State Supreme Court has already affirmed the redistricting process.  I am recommending NO simply as a protest against the way the process worked.  SLOB consensus is YES.

Giving Obama a Second Chance?

Jay McInerney, novelist, starts his argument for Obama's second term with this sentence.

Last week I was at a party in a Manhattan art gallery attended by the inevitable mix of artists, journalists and wealthy art collectors. 

I knew blogging gold was going to follow and he didn't disappoint.  He seeks to counter the arguments against Obama and really only makes matters worse.  He argues that the Wall Street types present should really be supporting Obama, because he hasn't rescinded the Bush tax cuts and Dodd-Frank was actually watered down and hasn't hurt business on the street.  He even admits that the financial industry had a hand in changing the legislation, but somehow this is a reason to re-elect Obama?  My take is that the whole thing is a government power grab, with the "too big to fail" status quo maintained. I think this is all intentional so that the government can intervene in any manner that the administration desires, when it wants to.  Rather than go for transparent and sensible reform, we get incomprehensible legislation like Dodd-Frank.  I have consistently called for increasing capital requirements based on size to reduce risk rather then non-transparent regulation like Dodd-Frank.  Romney is right to call for its repeal.  McInernry goes on in his praises of Obama:

What disappoints many of us outside of Wall Street is the feeling that Obama hasn't been nearly as effective in bailing out the lower and middle classes.

Not to put to fine a point on it, but the lower and middle classes need jobs; not an incomprehensible overhaul of health care or finance. Obama's mixed signals and increased regulations have killed jobs.

He goes on to the main argument that Romney will continue the failed policies of Bush, blah, blah, ad nauseum; when he just reminded us that Obama continued the Bush tax cuts.  Unbelievably, he has just argued that Obama's failure to veto their extension was a reason to vote for him.

He also claims that Obama's foreign policy is at least better than Bush's.  I had to laugh.  Dean has a very long list of ways in which Obama's foreign policy is exactly like Bush's.  Further, I have a detailed post about why his National Security Strategy could have easily been written by Donald Rumsfeld.

But best of all, in this supposedly post-racial era inaugurated by Obama himself, we must vote for Obama, because he is black, excuse me, African-American is the term used.  If the people outside the New York-DC media bubble really believed that, this country would be in big trouble.  Fortunately, their values are more rooted in the real world.

Ohio is Going for Romney - The Electoral Map Today

Nate Silver's blog is predicting that the Presidential race will be decided in Ohio.  Ohio is has a 44% chance of being the tipping point state in the race, as he puts it.  I agree that if Ohio goes for Romney, he becomes the President.  However, Obama is consistently holding a slight lead in the Ohio polling, but not holding the lead in national polling.  This doesn't make sense.  Nate Silver ponders the same question.  Rather than repeat his analysis, I prefer to focus on just Ohio.

Here are some results from the last four elections showing the Democratic vote percentages in Ohio vs the national totals.

1996 (Clinton)
US 49.2%
OH 47.4%
-1.8%

2000 (Gore)
US 48.4%
OH 48.1%
-0.3%

2004 (Kerry)
US 48.3%
OH 48.7%
+0.4%

2008 (Obama)
US 52.9%
OH 51.5%
-1.4%

Only once did the Democratic candidate outperform in Ohio compared to the national vote, Kerry in 2004, and only by 0.4%.  Right now the RCP poll averages are showing Romney ahead nationally by 1% and losing Ohio by 1.3%.  This result is highly unlikely, as it represents a swing of 2.3% in Obama's favor in Ohio, a clear outlier.  If Romney is winning nationally, I expect him to win Ohio by about a half to full point more.  Ohio is a swing state because it is representative of the country as a whole in its mix of urban, suburban, rural, white and non-white voters.  I put more credibility in the national polls than the state polling, so I have to believe that Romney is actually ahead in Ohio. As a result, here is where I think the map stands today.

My map is almost identical to Silver's "nowcast" with the exception that I have Ohio in the Romney column.

Sean Trende spends three pages to come to the conclusion that Ohio (or whichever state puts Romney over the top) will follow the national trend.

The tendency over the course of this cycle has been for the popular vote in the states to trend toward the national vote. Given this tendency, and the overall history of the Electoral College, the smart money suggests that these state polls will revert to a mean somewhere around the popular vote in relatively short order.

Weekend Music Chill

Getting an early jump on the weekend with some more modern music.  First, M83 with their hit Midnight City.



Also from M83, We Own the Sky.



The scenery reminds me of the Central Coast near San Simeon.

Obama Betting on Turning Out the Base

How else do you explain Biden's performance last night?  The smirking, the interrupting, the constant talk about the "middle class" in a not very persuasive tone are all indicators that Biden was there to fire up the base, not to persuade the undecided.  Courtesy of KT's tweet:

It sounds like Biden is playing to his base. The anger and the emotions aren't for the general public, but for the lefty donors and fanatics
— K T Cat (@ktcat) October 12, 2012

I saw Mitch McConnell in the spin room saying the same thing.  CNN's post debate survey points out that the debate was probably not very persuasive for either side overall, with a very slight edge to Ryan.

CNN Poll: Who did debate make you more likely to vote for? 28% Romney / 21% Obama.
— NRSC (@NRSC) October 12, 2012

I don't give a lot of credence to such polls, other than in broad brush; which is to say that the real intended effect for Biden isn't to persuade the undecideds.

I am starting to think the race is coming down to Ohio.  It seems highly unlikely that Romney would win in Ohio and lose Florida or Virginia.  The polls are starting to catch up with reality.  Further, the national polls seem good for Romney.  The Gallup poll start over-sampling non-whites by about 5% around the Democrat convention, which means their dead heat is probably Romney in the lead outside the margin of error.  Even with the oversampling, Romney has a 1% lead.

Quote of the Week

Not really a short quote, but Erick Erickson, editor of Red State, hits it out of the park with his discussion of why the American public increasingly does not trust the press, nor its literally intimate relationship with the left wing establishment Washington-New York axis.  Here he is inveighing against the obvious ills of the last few years of the Obama administration.

This is an administration whose Internal Revenue Service “accidentally” leaked confidential tax information about a number of conservative groups and the press buys the accident. This is an administration whose HHS Secretary was found guilty of a Hatch Act violation and the press said it was no big deal. This is an administration that put political cronies in Inspectors General positions, if it bothered to fill them at all, then saw the Inspectors General report away Fast & Furious, the New Black Panthers litigation, etc. and the press yawned.  

This is an administration that said Osama Bin Laden was dead and Al Qaeda was on the run when we now see Al Qaeda alive and our assassinated ambassador dragged through the streets of Benghazi. Still, most of the political press yawns.  

After all, there’s a non-scandal about Mitt Romney and abortion to focus on and his remarks on the 47% and . . .

Wow.

Devastating - Mother of Slain State Dept Worker Speaks

I didn't think CNN would run something like this, but they proved me wrong. Good for them. This is heartbreaking, but important for Americans to understand. The administration has obfuscated the truth of what happened in Benghazi on the 9-11 anniversary, even to those to whom they have a greater duty to be truthful.



"I cried on Obama's shoulder. Then he kind of looked off into the distance. So, that was worthless to me."

Click here if the embedded video isn't working in your browser.  Sorry about the opening commercial, but CNN has to make their coin.

How Does O'Keefe Keep Fooling the Left

Here is Project Veritas undercover with the DNC operation aiding voter fraud.

Who is the Adult in the Room?

Obama is complaining about Big Bird getting funding cut while the nation heads for a fiscal cliff, with no plans to take an offramp.  Meanwhile, the Obama campaign response to the Debacle in Denver is to trot out out a commercial featuring flightless yellow fowl.




The truth surrounding this issue is more prosaic, with Tickle me Elmo sales in the billions, Sesame Street denizens are among the 1%.

My Tea Party California Proposition Recommendations - Part 2

Here are my second set of ballot recommendations for California's November election.  I will put them all together in a single post later.  I reviewed recommendations from Temple of Mut, LeftCoastRebel, Richard Rider and Ballotpedia as part of research for these recommendations.

Proposition 36. Limits on Three Strikes Law. YES
I was never a big fan of the three strikes law, but I was more angry at career criminals being returned to the streets, so I supported that effort.  This is a reasonable attempt to reign in some of the absurd outcomes that have come out of that law.  It imposes the third strike life sentence only when the offense is violent or involved sex, drug or weapons related charges.  That seems sensible to me; the prisons are already overcrowded, I would only like to ensure that violent felons are in prison for life.  This is a management trade-off, given limited resources.  SLOB consensus is mixed, but leaning no.

Proposition 37. Mandatory Labeling - Genetic Engineered Food. NO
I don't need to do much research to know that this is more busybody legislation that will only drive up the price of food with compliance costs for agriculture and business.  Man has been genetically altering food since we planted the first crops millenia ago, all that has changed are the specific methods.  LeftCoastRebel points out that some genetic engineering reduces the need for pesticides, so shouldn't the greenies be for that?  Of course not, they only want to appear to help the environment as they tighten their grubby little socialist paws in a stranglehold on the economy.  SLOB consensus is a resounding NO.

Proposition 38. Molly Munger's Even Worser Tax Increase. NO
Since Governor Brown isn't really left wing enough to appease the California left, we actually need higher taxes than he is proposing in Proposition 30, according to the authors of this little gem.  Not content to raise taxes on "the rich," this proposition would raise taxes on most everyone.  SLOB consensus is NO.  By the way, I am happy to see two tax hikes on the ballot.  Conventional wisdom, supported by research says this makes it more likely that both will be defeated, see Ballotpedia.

Proposition 39. Complicating the CA Tax Code Further to Drive More Business Away. NO
I only had to read this line to know I would be opposing this measure: "Initially, this extra revenue would fund green energy projects, construction projects, public schools, and boost the state’s general fund."  Our very own Solyndra, funded by making life hell for businesses that have a partial presence in California.  How special.

Proposition 40. Confusing Measure Regarding State Senate Districts. NO
Here is a case where yes appears to mean no.  Voting for this measure would affirm the State Senate districts and No would overturn them.  Chris Reed documented the underhanded way in which these districts were drawn.  The question is whether overturning and letting the legislature or some other body redraw them is worth the effort.  Also, weighing on this vote is the fact that the State Supreme Court has already affirmed the redistricting process.  I am recommending NO simply as a protest against the way the process worked.  SLOB consensus is YES.

Bilbray's Call Center Needs an Upgrade

I got a call today from the Bilbray campaign, dialing me up from Del Mar (858-617-XXXX according to the caller id).  A young man asked me something that was hard to understand because the voice quality of the call was garbled.  I thought he asked if I was supporting Brian Bilbray, but in hindsight, I think he must have been asking if I would like to hear a message from the Congressman.  Then a recorded message from Bilbray started, again very garbled, although I could still tell it was Bilbray, having heard him in person.  I just hung up, a little frustrated.

I took to Twitter to voice my complaint.

Phone call from @bilbrayca50 campaign (Del Mar #). Garbled voice quality.Support him but he needs to improve campaign.
— B Daddy (@BDaddyLiberator) October 8, 2012

Since then, I have heard nothing from the campaign. I have noticed that big businesses monitor social media and often respond to legitimate complaints very quickly; but apparently this is not so with this campaign. I am posting about this because I support Bilbray, and just want him to run a better campaign. Seems that monitoring social media and monitoring the quality of one's phone bank would be helpful to that end.

This is Not a Recovery

Today's jobless numbers headlines (including a drop to 7.8%) are "too good to be true" according to our friends at Zerohedge.  The key quotes from that piece; first from economist David Rosenberg.

If it's too good to be true, then it probably is. 

But this is why the headline unemployment plunged, and that is what is very likely to make the front pages of the Saturday newspapers. Digging beneath the veneer, the quality of these so-called Household jobs is called into question, seeing as part-time work for 'economic reasons' dominated with a 582k run-up in September. And upon closer inspection of the actual amount of slack in the labour market, the more inclusive U6 unemployment rate that does a much better job at capturing underemployment, remained stubbornly stuck at 14.7%.

In other words, the key reason for the drop is that part-time work is now a full time job in the new survey.  Key measures of employment health that are not as volatile as the "household survey" (and therefore less manipulable, do not show the same rosy picture.  First, the labor force participation rate; a key metric of how many people are in the work force had a slight uptick, but we have seen this before and it constitutes statistical noise in a month on month basis.  Look at the data yourself.

Another measure of employment health is the percent of the population that is working. This is important because ultimately, these are the folks driving the economy, paying taxes and investing.

These numbers also had an uptick, but again, it looks like noise to me, not a trend.  I incorporate the actual data from the Federal government's Bureau of Labor Statistics, so that you can make an informed decision yourself.  On both of these measures, we see that nothing the administration has tried to do has made a difference in actually getting a recovery going.

More succinctly, fellow SLOB sent me this picture, which sums up the current situation.

Weekend Music Chill

Feeling a bit energized after this week's debates.  What Republican isn't?  So I was thinking about some music that I never really get tired of, that is definitely up tempo.  First, we have some Christmas light fun with Darude performing Sandstorm.




Next is the classic 80s techno-pop, New Order with Blue Monday (on my short list of songs that I never get tired of hearing.)

My Tea Party California Proposition Recommendations - Part 1

With voting by mail starting soon, I offer my opinions on California ballot propositions.  As I have stated repeatedly, the tea party is not an official organization, so my recommendations are my own but consonant with tea party principles of limited government, lower taxes, liberty and rule of law.  I also include a consensus among fellow San Diego tea party bloggers (SLOBs) in my recommendations.  More recommendations to follow, this is taking some time to research.

Proposition 30. Jerry Brown's Tax Increase. NO
The California Teacher's Association is by far the biggest donor to this initiative, which is all we need to know to vote against it, as they are the nexus of evil, the very nadir to all that is good in politics in this state (and their ain't much good.)  Brown is hinting at horrible outcomes, like closing schools, if this initiative doesn't pass.  Since it won't, I hope he makes good.  One argument in favor is a bald face lie, that only the rich will pay, because this increases sales taxes that the poor pay.  California's schools are terrible, and not for lack of funding. SLOB consensus is also NO.

Proposition 31. Two Year Budget Cycle. YES
This is not a perfect proposition, but it's not all bad.  It reforms some of the state budget processes and shifts some revenue to local government while taking it away from Sacramento and gives local government some tools to fight unfunded mandates.  I don't like the two year cycle, which will be used by the legislature to cook the books, even worse.  The question is how much worse could it get?   That's a judgement call and call me a cock-eyed optimist, but I don't think the legislature and the governor could screw things up any more than they have done to date. SLOB consensus is mixed.

Proposition 32. Paycheck Protection Initiative. YES
I am not a fan of banning contributions to political campaigns by classes of organizations, but restrictions on corporations are already in place.  This proposition prohibits corporations and unions from donating directly to political campaigns with money collected from employee payroll deductions.  In general, this is a good idea, but the unions hate it.  Once again, the CTA is the biggest donor fighting this proposition.  This has a chance of becoming somewhat of a Wisconsin style reform that turns the tide against union control of state government.  SLOB consensus is YES.

Proposition 33. Some Technical Changes to Auto Insurance. YES
I can barely bring myself to care, since insurance companies shouldn't be subject to this kind of micro-management of their policies in the first place.  The changes make sense because they give the insurers some more options to reward good behavior and give military a chance to retain favored treatment if their coverage lapses due to deployment.  SLOB consensus is YES.

Proposition 34. Death Penalty Repeal. YES
I will state upfront that I am out of synch with many tea partyers on this one.  I feel deeply and passionately that the death penalty should be repealed.  Even though some crimes are so heinous as to deserve death, it is not good for our society to suffer that any should die with the acquiescence or action of the government.  I oppose abortion, euthanasia and the ACA on the same basis.  Some quotes from a previous post on the subject:

The tea party is nothing if not skeptical of government. Yet through the death penalty, we entrust to government the ultimate power of deciding the life or death of American citizens. I do not trust that our institutions of justice can apply the penalty fairly or without error. The thought of a man (and it is usually men) who would be wrongfully put to death is too horrible to contemplate. Yet, we have any number of cases where those on death row have been exonerated. My skepticism of government leads me to conclude that it cannot be trusted with a task such as deciding life and death, even of criminals.

SLOBs consensus is NO.

Proposition 35. Human Trafficking. NO
Human traffickers are the scum of the earth, but there are plenty of laws that already provide punishment.  I oppose any law that subverts the rule of law enshrined in the constitution.  This law limits defendants rights to cross-examination and could taint those not connected to the crime of trafficking.  Temple of Mut points out that the costs of enforcement are probably wildly underestimated.  SLOB consensus is mixed.

Romney-Obama Debate Caption Contest

Quick caption contest for some post-debate fun.  Mrs. Daddy's contribution follows:

Obama: Did somebody fart? 

Romney: Yeah, that was you, buddy.

Closing Remarks in Presidential Debate

Obama seems rambling and incoherent, talking about stories about people that have little to do with his actual policies, in his closing remarks.

Romney concern about direction of America on two different paths, favors his side, because the results so far don't favor Obama and Obama has pushed the country farther to the left than it wanted to go.  

Romney seemed much more confident. 

I am very pleased, indeed. (For the record, I have not looked at any other punditry, except for a bit on Twitter.)

I also liked the civil tone of the debate and the way they shook hands with their families present afterwards.

Romney is Striking the Right Tone

I will not be able to blog much about tonight's debate. From what little I have seen, Mitt Romney is striking the right tone. He is on the attack in a fact-filled and respectful way that is still devastating. 50 years of oil depletion allowance burned down for green energy subsidies to the likes of Solyndra was my favorite fact.

Neither candidate seems especially animated; but I am liking the subject matter as favoring Romney. The contradictions of Obama's policies are coming home to roost.

Calling out Dodd-Frank as supporting too big to fail is a great point that is both conservative, correct and resonates with the middle class. I am so impressed with Romney's critique.

Presidential Debate Prep

The broad outlines of the upcoming Presidential debates are already known, at least on the Democrat side.  That's because they don't really ever change their appeal away from class warfare every four years.  The sameness of invoking "tax cuts for the rich" by Obama should leave Mitt Romney plenty of room to operate in tomorrow night's debate in Colorado.  He knows the President's line of attack and should easily be able to put the notoriously thin skinned Obama on the defensive.

I offer some easy pickings for the Romney campaign, free of charge.

1. Is it better to give businesses tax cuts or funnel those same federal taxes to your campaign donors through so called "green" energy programs.
2. If small businesses create jobs, and it is mostly small business owners that are "the rich," how are we going to create jobs without tax cuts for small businesses?
3. Is it better to use tax dollars to enrich union pensioners in the auto bailout at the expense of Indiana teachers pension fund?

Romney can easily defeat Obama with an aggressive campaign that highlights issues that the media has been complicit in not covering, to help Obama.  Fast and Furious and the debacle in Benghazi come to mind.  I don't know why it appears that Romney has been holding back, but it's time to play hardball; especially against a candidate that looks positively untruthful every time he is caught off guard.  (See Obama's poker tells for a long list of his disagreeable and feigned countenances.)

Looming Sequestration and Defense - Obama Pressure to Violate the Law

Without taking a position on the wisdom of sequestration, I have it on good authority that it is the official policy of the Department of Defense not to plan for the eventuality; despite widespread belief that it will.  In my opinion, this is because the word has come down from the administration to ignore what is happening so that defense contractors who might vote Democrat won't change their minds.  Of course, its junior enlisted who might be hurt worst, but here is how the administration is protecting them; answer, not much.

Though military paychecks would be protected, enlisted sailors Armstrong has encountered worry about how their housing and health care benefits might be slashed. Accounts for both would likely undergo harsh cost-cutting measures under sequestration.
“Those also are important parts of the troops’ benefit and compensation packages,” she said. “So when you say that personnel accounts are going to be untouched, what we are hearing is: They may be impacted.”
Also heightening anxiety is the dearth of details from the White House and the Pentagon on how the Defense Department would make nearly $54 billion in cuts to defense spending required in 2013 alone, if sequestration is triggered.

Meanwhile, administration pressure on defense contractor not to obey the WARN act is mounting.  Red State tipped us that Lockheed-Martin will not send out layoff warnings, under pressure from the "most corrupt administration, evah."

More of that famed Obama leadership.  These cuts are the law.  The Congress hasn't passed a budget in so long that I can't recall when it last happened.  Passing a budget would be the only way to avoid the cuts; so the President's policy is to pretend they aren't happening.