links for 2011-02-16

  • The problem is politicians haven’t done a very good job of explaining this to the American public. Daniels declines to speculate on whether or not he’ll run for president next year. But if he does, his aim will be to build support for a tough, specific fiscal agenda bolstered by sustainable, affordable health policy. Without that support, he says, there’d be little point in running: “Winning an election without a consensus is not worth very much.”


    Read it all

    A perspective from a Republican governor who knows America is in trouble

  • Republicans took the FCC to task for enacting a net neutrality order without any sound market-based analysis to justify it at a House hearing Wednesday.

    “The FCC has done nothing to specifically quantify any harm requiring intervention, or the potential harm to consumers, innovation or the economy from the proposed rules,” Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee Fred Upton (R-Mich.) said during his opening remarks.


    What Obama cannot do legilsatively he is attempting an end-around with executive regulations.

    I don't think the Congress is going to let this stand.

  • When will my dear friend Ann start to address the substantive problems with Christie's actual positions or are we going to get another year of "only Christie can win" fortune cookie logic?

    Does she support his positions on: gun control, amnesty, the appointment of an Islamist to the bench, the green agenda, his campaigning for Mike Castle, his MIA on health care litigation, etc.; and how does she think this would energize the base outside of New Jersey? Has the Tea Party even in NJ been pushing for his candidacy? No. Yes, he's solid in his YouTube battles with teachers and his efforts to try and address NJ's budget problems, the outcome of which have yet to be determined. But the federal government is a vast enterprise that requires a solid conservative at the helm, especially now.

    Oh, and Ann, I backed Fred Thompson. He lost. I reluctantly wound up voting for McCain like millions of my fellow conservatives. Who did you back?
    Mark Levin has a point.

  • Nevertheless, this year’s Republican field is on the low end of popularity as compared to most recent ones — and early primary polls are meaningful enough that this is worth considering, along with other factors. The way that I would recommend thinking about Mr. Obama’s re-election chances, at this early stage, is to start with the baseline re-election rate for incumbent presidents (which is about 70 percent), and then make a list of other factors that might lead one to believe that this figure overestimates or underestimates them. Under the list of favorable factors for Mr. Obama, I would include a bullet-point for “Public has tepid view of Republican candidates; Republican nominee might be weaker than average.”

    Something for Republican strategists to worry about? Sure, if they enjoy worrying. But probably not something for them to lose any sleep over until and unless they are on the verge of nominating one of their more unpopular alternatives.
    GOP operatives are watching

  • The political press is eagerly awaiting the results of the straw poll at the Conservative Political Action Conference, which is supposed to serve as a barometer of the presidential candidate preferences of conservative elites. Unfortunately, if you look at CPAC's track record, the straw poll is not a meaningful predictor of eventual GOP presidential nominees.


    CPAC is worthless as an indicator but who shows up is an important show of organization.

  • At this stage of the presidential contest, "favorability" reflects public familiarity with the candidates. As the presidential race heats up, and candidates enter the public eye, partisan affiliations will kick in, and Republican-leaning voters will contribute to higher favorability ratings for the GOP slate. By the time the nominee is chosen, partisan rallying will ensure that the candidate has high favorability ratings, even if they began as a virtual unknown. At best, current polling for GOP candidates makes for interesting trivia, and Republicans should ignore it.


    I disagree.

    Early favorability polling will not only set the GOP Presidential Field but direct party resources vis a vis Congressonal/Senate races