New Mexico

Republican Weakness In Defeating Democratic Incumbents In Senate Races A Long Term Trend!

In all of the discussion of US Senate races in the upcoming Midterm Elections of 2014, many fail to realize the historical record of the failure of Republicans to have much success in defeating Democratic incumbents over a long period of time, while Democrats have been much more successful in that regard.

From 1946 to 2012, only TWICE have Republicans been able to defeat a large number of Democratic incumbents–1946 (10) and 1980 (12).

Since 1982, the number of Democratic incumbents defeated in each two year cycle has never been more than two, and six times there have been NO Democratic incumbents defeated.

Meanwhile, Democrats have defeated Republican incumbents in large numbers many times—8 in 1948; 10 in 1958; 7 in 1986; 5 in 2000; and 6 in 2006.

So to assume that a large number of Democratic incumbents, including Mary Landrieu of Louisiana; Kay Hagan of North Carolina; Mark Begich of Alaska; Mark Pryor of Arkansas; Mark Udall of Colorado; Al Franken of Minnesota; Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire; Tom Udall of New Mexico; and Mark Warner of Virginia will be defeated, defies history!

Since World War II, the reelection rate for US Senators is 80 percent.

And since 1980, Democrats have defeated 38 Republican incumbents, to just 12 for Republicans defeating Democratic incumbents!

Any Chance Of A GOP Woman President Anytime Soon? NO!

The Republican Party is in deep trouble among women in America.

Sure, there are the religious women who are against abortion, and those women who have no problem with the male dominance and sexism of Republican office holders.

These numbers are probably about one third of the nation, and primarily in the South, Great Plains, and Rocky Mountain West, not areas generally of high population.

But in the Northeast and New England, the upper Midwest, and the Pacific Coast, women as a group are outraged at the male chauvinism and sexism of Republican office holders in Congress, and even in state legislatures.

Women in polls are overwhelmingly Democrats, not so much because the Democrats are without fault or shortcomings, but because they have demonstrated concern for women’s issues, such as health care, education, child care, raising of the minimum wage, single mothers, maternity leaves, campus rapes, and so many other issues that affect women, whether single or married, young or old, every day.

And Republican women officeholders offer no relief, as they back up the sexist, chauvinist men proudly!

Yes, there are four Republican women Governors, although Jan Brewer of Arizona is leaving, and no one would perceive her as caring about women’s issues, or really, anyone but herself and her own selfish interests. She has been a disgraceful, hard hearted Governor of Arizona.

What about Mary Fallin of Oklahoma? She allowed executions to go forth that are clearly promoting “cruel and unusual punishment”, and really torture. She is a disgrace to womanhood and her own reputation!

Then there is Nikki Haley, who would have ambitions, but her record as Governor, and her lack of compassion for poor women in her state, as well as poor people generally, disqualifies her on a national level.

And then, we have Susana Martinez, probably the least objectionable of the four GOP women Governors, but still, except for her Mexican American heritage, seen as a lightweight, and really, a President from New Mexico, who has not served in national government at all? Give us all a break!

So now to the US House of Representatives! Michele Bachmann of Minnesota is leaving government, thank goodness, and yet may face prosecution in scandals involving her Presidential campaign in 2012. Did she ever have anything constructive to say in her eight years in Congress? Of course not, instead coming across as totally looney and uncaring, and ready to issue idiotic, stupid and false statements in unison with equally lunatic male colleagues such as Steve King of Iowa and Louie Gohmert of Texas as only the most outrageous of many looney male Republican colleagues in the lower chamber.

Then we have Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, who causes any sane person the desire to roll eyes constantly and shake heads, as to her outrageous statements, not quite as crazy as Bachmann, but still enough to make one wonder what planet she comes from!

Then, there is Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington, the chair of the House Republican Conference, making her the highest ranking woman Republican ever in the House. She is a pleasant lady, but is not seen as Presidential material, and seems lacking in true understanding of many women’s issues.

The rest of the Republican women in the House are not worthy of consideration at all on a Presidential level, and there are only 19 women Republicans in the House anyway, compared to 63 for the Democrats.

So now to the US Senate, where there are only four Republican women. Susan Collins of Maine is the most distinguished, followed by Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, but neither is seen as Presidential timber, and they come from states extremely small in population, if not land area.

Deb Fischer of Nebraska is a newcomer, not particularly distinguished, and not seen as Presidential level, and finally, we have Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, who is often boomed as a possible future candidate, but realistically, no one should put betting money on her, although if any woman Republican presently in office were to announce for President, it would be her.

Face the facts, women Republicans are few and far between, and mostly poorly qualified, and if there is to be a woman President anytime soon, it will be a Democrat!

And those potential Presidents include Hillary Clinton, along with Senators Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota.

Imagine A Presidential Election Battle Without Any Previous Candidates In The Race!

The thought has crossed this blogger’s mind what it would be like if for once, just once, no one who had previously competed for the Presidential nomination of either party, nor had been a Vice Presidential running mate, became involved in the upcoming Presidential Election campaign of 2016.

Think of who would be eliminated from consideration:

Democrats (8)–Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Al Gore, Jerry Brown, John Kerry, Howard Dean, Bill Richardson, Dennis Kucinich

Republicans (11)–Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, Mike Huckabee, Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Herman Cain, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, Newt Gingrich, Jon Huntsman, John Kasich

Who would be left to compete?

Democrats (13)–Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Kirsten Gillibrand, Andrew Cuomo, Martin O’Malley, Mark Warner, Corey Booker, Amy Klobuchar, Jay Nixon, John Hickenlooper, Brian Schweitzer, Deval Patrick, Rahm Emanuel

Republicans (13)–Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, Chris Christie, Bobby Jindal, Peter King, Mike Pence, Rob Portman, Scott Walker, Brian Sandoval, Susana Martinez, Nikki Haley

One can wonder who would be competitive for the Presidential nominations, and who would galvanize support among the population and go on to be the nominees of the two major political parties!

We would have a true “donnybrook” situation, with anyone having the potential to be the nominees, “catch fire”, and go on to be the 45th President of the United States!

If this author was to venture an educated guess, one would come to the following conclusions:

Democrats–The major battle would be among Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, Martin O’Malley and Mark Warner.

Republicans–The major battle would be among Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Mike Pence and Rob Portman.

The final battle would be between Warren and O’Malley for the Democratic nomination, and between Marco Rubio and Mike Pence for the Republican nomination.

The two finalists would be Martin O’Malley and Marco Rubio, with O’Malley being the winner and the 45th President of the United States!

This is due to the reality of the Electoral College, which strongly favors the Democrats to win the White House in 2016 and beyond, as the Northeast, New England, Upper Midwest, and Pacific Coast are strongly “Blue”, and most of the “swing states” are favored to go “Blue” as well, including Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, Virginia, Ohio, and Iowa.

Florida and North Carolina would be more difficult for the Democrats, particularly if Rubio is the GOP nominee, but the electoral vote would still be heavily Democratic, even without those two states!

Gay Marriage Case Likely On Way To Supreme Court For Ruling One Year From Now!

The issue of gay marriage is likely on its way to the Supreme Court, and almost certainly will be decided a year from now, in the most blockbuster case of 2015!

The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals has declared gay marriage to be a basic right, and that means marriages can move ahead in the near future in Utah, which brought the case, along with Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, Wyoming and New Mexico!

There is a temporary hold, but it is a major step forward, and insures, almost certainly, that the case will go to the Supreme Court this fall.

And it is ALMOST certain that we will have a Loving V. Virginia (interracial marriage) case result next year, allowing gay marriage everywhere in America, whether religious right wingers like it or not! One must realize that no church or other religious establishment would have to promote it, but civil marriage would move forward.

The belief is that there are four certain supporters of gay marriage on the Court—Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan.

Additionally, Justice Anthony Kennedy was the one who decided the path breaking case of Lawrence V. Texas, which greatly expanded the gay rights movement in 2003!

And it is possible to believe that Chief Justice John Roberts could also add his vote, making the vote next June 6-3!

Time For Gay Marriage Case Before Supreme Court, As With Interracial Marriage Case In 1967!

With recent gay marriage advancements in New Mexico and Utah, making it now a total of 18 states and Washington DC allowing same sex marriage, it is time for a case to come before the Supreme Court regarding the right of two gay men or two lesbians to be able to marry and be accepted as equal everywhere in the United States.

Just because many “religious” people, both Christian and Jewish, do not wish to accept gay marriage is not a reason to deny equal protection under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.

No one is saying that any particular church or synagogue must perform gay marriages, or that everyone has to be happy and approving of such marriages.

Marriage should not be based on what others think about it, as it is a basic human right, that one has a right to be happy, to love whoever he or she chooses, and to have it acknowledged in civil law.

If one does not like gay marriage, fine, but one does not have the right to deny others because you have a problem with the lifestyle of others.

The same situation existed regarding interracial marriage, and only in 1967, in Loving V. Virginia, did the Supreme Court rule that no state or locality could ban or prevent two adults of any race from marrying.

Even back then, there were religious leaders and sects who disapproved of interracial marriage, and people were being prosecuted for trying to marry, or even living together.

Such a concept is oppressive government, and it is time for this to stop, and for all people to be given the right to do what they wish regarding relationships in their adult lives.

So Supreme Court, it is time to accept a case, maybe out of the Utah government fighting the new gay marriage edict of a federal judge, and to expand human rights, which is the whole basis of American democracy, and the sooner the better!

Advancements On Gay Rights, But Plenty Of Struggle Ahead

The vote of the US Senate yesterday to agree to overcome a potential filibuster, and allow a final vote on ENDA (Employment Non-Discrimination Act) is a great move forward on civil rights.

The proposed law, discussed for many years, would ban employers from firing, refusing to hire, or discriminating against workers or job applicants based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.

The procedural vote was 61-30 with 54 Democrats (all but Claire McCaskill, who was not present), and 7 Republicans (Susan Collins, Kelly Ayotte, Dean Heller, Mark Kirk,. Rob Portman, Orrin Hatch, and Pat Toomey) in favor.

So the bill will pass the Senate in the next few days, but disturbing is that 30 Republicans had the nerve to vote for continued discrimination, and 8 Republicans were not recorded as voting.

It will be interesting to see if any of these 38 Republicans will vote for the final bill, particularly such Senators as John McCain and Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker and John Thune, who at times have shown some moderation as compared to most in the Senate Republican caucus.

At the same time, Illinois moved today toward final acceptance of gay marriage, making that state the 15th to have gay marriage, going into effect by the summer of 2014.

At the same time, other states seem to be moving in the same direction, including Hawaii, Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado, Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, although at different measurements of progress.

Regarding the ENDA legislation, IF Speaker John Boehner allowed an open vote, the legislation would become law, with most Democrats and enough Republicans to make it the law of the land , but Boehner has indicated that he will not allow a vote, which, if it is pursued all the way, would stop any chance to do what is morally right to do, stop job discrimination, So pressure must be brought to convince him to change his mind, and allow a vote even without a majority of his caucus.

Total Poverty, Deprivation, Lack Of Safety Net For Substantial Numbers Of Americans The Reality: The “American Dream” Denied!

Despite the denial and lack of concern of many conservatives and Republicans about the tremendous maldistribution of wealth which has developed in the thirty two years since Ronald Reagan came to the Presidency, new statistics indicate just how desperate many Americans are, and how that desperation is particularly obvious in the South and in the Southwest parts of the United States.

Nearly half of US households, containing about 132 million Americans are in a dire situation, where they do not have any emergency funds for as little as three months, if a natural disaster, medical emergency or sudden unemployment occurred.

Think of the mental anguish these people go through if any of the above emergencies suddenly arise, with a feeling of no hope, and the possibility of homelessness, total destruction of personal credit, and the likelihood of becoming sick from stress itself!

Thirty percent of Americans do not have a savings account, and eight percent do not have any bank account at all.

In ten states, the poverty and hopelessness of a substantial part of the population is most evident, including in order:

Nevada
Georgia
Mississippi
Florida
Arkansas
North Carolina
Tennessee
New Mexico
Arizona
Louisiana

Notice also that only three states of these ten listed are “Blue” or Democratic (Nevada, Florida, New Mexico), while the other seven are “Red” or Republican.

With so many people in these states and others having little or no health insurance coverage, and low wage jobs predominating, and high credit card debt levels, one wonders how these unfortunate citizens cope with waking up daily, with such gloom and doom on the horizon! The “American Dream” is being denied!

Medicaid Expansion Under ObamaCare Only Agreed To By Two Republican Hispanic Governors: Interesting Development!

Republican Governors are refusing to take up the offer of Medicaid expansion for their states under ObamaCare, despite the fact that the Obama Administration has arranged for total funding for the Medicaid expansion for those states for three full years, and 90 percent coverage of costs after that.

This is a means to insure that poor people will have medical care, and one would think that any Governor would wish to cover his or her poorer constituents, as a way to show concern about the welfare and health of the less fortunate in the states.

But NO, no way, is the reaction of all the Republican Governors who were elected in 2010, as part of the Tea Party Movement wave, with the major exception of the Governors of New Mexico (Susana Martinez) and Nevada (Brian Sandoval), both Hispanic governors of Mexican American ethnicity.

So Rick Scott of Florida, Nikki Haley of South Carolina, Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Rick Perry of Texas, Paul LePage of Maine and other GOP Governors are refusing to participate, but the fact that the two Hispanic Republican Governors are doing so makes them stand out as cooperating, while the two Hispanic (Cuban American) Senators who are Republicans, Ted Cruz of Texas and Marco Rubio of Florida, are totally against involvement in ObamaCare!

Is this due to politics, that Martinez and Sandoval are trying to distinguish themselves from Cruz and Rubio for future Republican Hispanic battles for national office–that is, for the Presidency?

Who can say, but it is certainly very curious, to say the least, that this situation has arisen. But kudos to Martinez and Sandoval for doing the right thing for their poorer citizens! And the fact that they are Governors, not Senators, could be a plus for them in the future in Republican politics!

Gary Johnson And Virgil Goode Could Siphon Support For Mitt Romney In Several “Swing” States

Gary Johnson is the former Republican New Mexico Governor, and Libertarian Party candidate for President. He is also on the ballot in 47 states.

Virgil Goode is a former Republican Congressman from a district in Virginia, and Constitution Party candidate for President. He is also on the ballot in two dozen states.

Johnson is believed to have support in New Mexico, Montana, Nevada and Colorado, while Goode is thought to have support in Virginia.

Notice that these are all considered “swing” states, although New Mexico has been seen as less so than it once was, and is generally not included in recent months as being in that category. And Montana is one of those few states thought to be Republican, but with some possibility of switching to the Democrats.

But also notice that all of these states are now considered to be in favor of Barack Obama, except Montana.

So the question arises, will these former Republicans hurt Romney enough that he loses these “swing” states and even Montana, or will Obama win even with some support for Johnson and Goode in these states?

In other words, can Johnson and Goode end up for Romney as Ralph Nader was for Al Gore in 2000, the difference in votes that caused Gore’s defeat for President?

It will be interesting to see if either or both third party candidates have a significant impact on the results of the election!

Latest Poll Averages Show Obama Ahead Of Romney In Eleven Of Twelve Battleground States!

Barack Obama may be only slightly ahead of Mitt Romney nationally in the average of various polls–47.3 percent to 44.7 percent, but when one looks at twelve battleground or swing states, he is ahead of Romney in all but North Carolina, where he trails Romney by 48.5 to 46.5, two percentage points.

Obama is ahead by almost 6 points in Ohio; by 2.5 points in Virginia; by 3 points in Florida; by 6.5 points in Pennsylvania; by almost 4 points in Iowa; by 5.5 points in Nevada; by 5 points in Wisconsin; by 7 points in New Mexico; by 6.5 points in Michigan; and by almost 3 points in New Hampshire. In Colorado, the margin is only two tenths of one point for Obama over Romney, nearly an even split.

So Obama is ahead in 10 of the 12 states listed, all of which he won in 2008, nearly even in Colorado, and only behind in North Carolina!

Not bad considering the blistering attacks and lies and deception that have been going on for three and a half years as President, greater than any President since the last one who was called every name in the book, and yet won a landslide victory in 1936 in the midst of the Great Depression, with unemployment levels still much higher than they are in 2012.

The author is referring here to Franklin D. Roosevelt!