Wednesday Open Thread [6.10.15]

Filed in National by on June 10, 2015

Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball: “If you’re looking for a dark-horse entrant into the first tier, it might be John Kasich. Few would bet on him today, but no sensible party will easily dismiss a popular two-term governor of swing-state Ohio. And Kasich’s federal, state and private sector experiences comprise impressive preparation for the presidency.”

“The primary obstacle for Kasich are his positions on Obamacare and Common Core, which have earned him the RINO label. He also has to generate interest in a hurry so he can get into the upcoming debates, for which he currently does not qualify. And Kasich must make a convincing case that he’s not just another Jon Huntsman, who won more plaudits from the media than votes from Republicans in 2012.”

Divider

“Republicans in Congress are worried the Supreme Court will hand them a major headache this month if it rules against the federal health insurance exchanges in more than 30 states, ending subsidies for millions of people,” The Hill reports.

And we are going to make them own it. It’s their lawsuit. They have wanted to kill Obamacare from the beginning. They are responsible. They will get the blame.

Divider

“I’ve got a lot of friends. We’ll have a rotating first lady.” — Sen. Lindsey Graham, quoted by the Daily Mail, on how the unmarried presidential candidate will handle the job of First Lady. This raises an interesting question: can a bachelor President get elected? They have before (Grover Cleveland, Woodrow Wilson, James Buchanan), but that was before the dawn of TV, and before the influential First Ladies such as Jackie Kennedy, Eleanor Roosevelt, Betty Ford, Nancy Reagan and Hillary Clinton.

Divider

Wall Street Journal: “First, the math is simply too tough for Democrats. They now hold just 188 House seats, which means they would need to win 30 seats now held by Republicans. Even in a good year, that’s too steep a hill to climb. So while Republicans do have more seats in danger in the changed environment of 2016, the numbers aren’t big enough to suggest a change. The Cook Report lists 22 Republican-held seats that are among the most vulnerable this cycle, and just seven Democratic ones, but even a clean sweep of such seats by the Democrats wouldn’t be enough to change control.”

“Second, that difficult math is the result of years of Republican efforts to draw up congressional districts that are safe for GOP candidates. Using their control of more governor’s offices and state legislatures in recent years, Republicans have been in the driver’s seat for reapportioning congressional districts and the advantage shows. The vast majority of Republican House members are safe from serious challenge from Democrats; only 16 of them won their seats by fewer than 10 percentage points, the Cook Report says.”

“And third, Democrats enter 2016 behind a president whose popularity is only in the mediocre range. In the latest rolling Gallup survey, Mr. Obama’s job approval stood at 46%–which is better than the 42.6% he averaged last year but not enough to sweep other Democrats forward.”

Divider

Washington Post: “The incredibly swift public opinion battle on same-sex marriage appears to be over — even moreso than you might think. A new Pew Research Center survey released this week reinforced what we already know: That a clear and growing majority of Americans support same-sex marriage.”

“But here’s something perhaps even more telling: Even those who don’t support same-sex marriage (mainly, religious conservatives) also think it’s inevitable same-sex marriage will soon be legal across America.”

Divider

OHIO–SENATOR–Public Policy Polling: Sen. Rob Portman (R) 43, Fmr. Gov. Ted Strickland (D) 41.

PENNSYLVANIA–SENATOR–Robert Morris University: Joe Sestak (D) 34, Sen. Pat Toomey (R) 28.

I am very suspicious of two candidate polls that shows percentages for both in the low 30’s. It tells me that the pollster did not ask which way they were leaning. Still, 28% is bad for incumbent.

Divider

Rick Klein on Marco Rubio’s financial problems: “It’s easy enough to mock a particular media portrayal of Marco Rubio, cast as – shock! – someone who has struggled with his finances yet owns a luxury boat that isn’t that fancy and an expensive home that looks, well, fine. (The previous New York Times take on Rubio’s past, on his driving record, didn’t help its subsequent story.)”

“But even as Rubio’s campaign raises money off of the pair of Times stories, seeds of serious questions about Rubio are being planted. There are relationships with people as varied as former Rep. David Rivera and billionaire Norman Braman; credit-card missteps involving personal charges on a state-party card; and even the still-strange and very recent decision to cash out some 401(k) funds, penalty and all. If the story develops into one of a financially strapped young family, trying to make ends meet, it will all be part of a stump speech soon enough. But if it becomes one about a man with a law degree and six-figure income who couldn’t keep his finances straight, it will become part of a debate-stage attack just as quickly.”

About the Author ()

Comments (12)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Unstable Isotope says:

    It’s the first polling I’ve seen with Sestak ahead.

  2. Jason330 says:

    Seeing their Golden Goose broiled, and their Gravy Train derailed by Fox News, New Hampshire Republicans are hitting back:

    A group of New Hampshire Republicans want Fox News and national party leaders to change the first televised presidential debate in August, saying limiting it to 10 candidates “would undermine the very nature” of the primary process.

    The New Hampshire Republican leaders… said the debate criteria of allowing the top 10 candidates based on their position in national polls is too limiting and would undermine their state’s traditional [HIGHLY LUCRATIVE] role.

  3. jim center says:

    I’m hoping the supreme court shts down healthcare for 6.3 million people in the Red states. If the message can get out to them that the R’s did this to them, we could pick up a few voters in the next presidential race. Go Bernie Sanders

  4. RobberBaron says:

    Only problem with that is exactly ZERO Republicans voted to pass Obamacare. All the mess and destruction is on the Dems and Socialists.

  5. cassandra m says:

    And ZERO Republicans have a plan to replace all of this health insurance people now have. All the mess and destruction is on the Repubs. Because they don’t have a plan B.

  6. Aoine says:

    Cass – they do have a Plan B – to destroy Plan A

    they just don’t have a POSITIVE or productive plan B

  7. RobberBaron says:

    Wrong again.
    See this article in the Washington Examiner.
    A Republican-led Congress would attempt to dismantle Obamacare one provision at a time and would try to replace the law the same piecemeal way, using a collection of proposals for improving the nation’s health insurance system that have garnered at least some bipartisan support during the past four years.

    “It’s not a 2,700-page bill we’d wheel down to the Senate floor,” a GOP leadership aide told the Washington Examiner, referencing the massive legislative document that became the Affordable Care Act.

    Ideas for replacing Obamacare have long been discussed in both chambers, outlined in legislation, and passed in the GOP-led House during the past two years.

    The proposals consist of allowing people to purchase insurance across state lines, reining in medical malpractice awards, expanding health savings accounts, and allowing small businesses to pool resources to lower insurance costs for employees. Medicaid reform is another element of the GOP’s healthcare overhaul plan.
    Sign Up for the Health Care newsletter!
    More Stories

    This week’s election could finally afford the GOP the opportunity to take on Obamacare, a move it has been promising since President Obama signed the bill into law on March 23, 2010.

    But first Republicans would have to dismantle much of the program, which may be impossible to do.

    The law is largely unpopular, in part because it has cost more than anticipated and caused many people to lose the doctors and health insurance they had.

    A mid-October Pew poll found the public disapproved of the law, 51 percent to 43 percent.

    But Obamacare has expanded coverage, particularly for the poor, and the law’s healthcare exchanges are functioning well in some states.

    The mixed public response to Obamacare has left Republicans in a quandary. They can’t simply gut the law, particularly if parts of it are popular. Besides, their majority won’t be big enough to override a guaranteed veto from Obama.

    Even if they could repeal the law, they can’t replace it with another colossal piece of legislation.

  8. cassandra_m says:

    The Washington Examiner? Really? You may think that is useful information, but if you do, you are their core audience.

    But if the GOP thinks that they can survive with letting 8M or so Americans lose their insurance, then I have a GOP minority outreach plan to sell ya.

  9. RobberBarron says:

    The 8 million you cite is not a verifiable number, but I will concede it. In fact, because of subsidies and the expansion of Medicaid, I am funding it. I don’t care. This is the United States of America and our citizens should be cared for. What troubles me is my coverage has been gutted and has become difficult to afford. We could have absorbed the needy and still allowed the existing policy holders to keep what they had and liked. Get off your high horse, please. This is not about the uninsured, it is about controlling the entire system.

  10. cassandra_m says:

    Of course it is verifiable — there is Google. Even if you get your information from the Washington Examiner, not knowing how to search Google isn’t forgivable. Where I learn that my number is too low:

    Some 9.5 million Americans have signed up for health insurance for 2015 on Obamacare exchanges, federal officials said Tuesday.

    And, since employers who provide health are to their employees can expense that, you subsidize the insurance costs for those folks too. Get your head out of your ass.

  11. Geezer says:

    When this:

    “Sign Up for the Health Care newsletter!
    More Stories”

    shows up in the block of text you have lifted, it’s a pretty good sign you don’t read things carefully.

    I’ll leave it to you to explain how something with a 51% disapproval is “largely unpopular,” as opposed to “slightly” so.

  12. Liberal Elite says:

    @RB “What troubles me is my coverage has been gutted and has become difficult to afford.”

    Your coverage wasn’t gutted. It was brought into compliance. No longer can insurance companies sell you crap insurance dressed up to be something that might actually protect you…

    You fail to realize the health benefit to all of us of sending the scam artists and scoundrels home.