What stories will shape debate going into midterm elections?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
With the midterm elections only months away, Americans are fed up with both major political parties.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/05/13/art.elephant.donkey.jpg caption=" "]
A new Gallup Poll shows near record-low favorable ratings for both Democrats and Republicans. The GOP has a measly 36 percent favorable rating - that's only five points above their all-time low in 1998 when the Republican-led Congress voted to impeach President Clinton.
The Democrats aren't much better. Their favorable rating is only 43 percent - just a couple points higher than their record low, which came during the recent health care debate.
Gallup says that low ratings don't usually occur for both parties simultaneously. Typically when one is down, the other is up. But this just goes to show you how disgusted Americans are with politicians of all stripes these days.
Meanwhile in a piece called "Stories that Could Rock the Summer," Politico looks at some of the issues that could shake up the elections in the next couple of months.
At the top of the list, no surprise: The Gulf oil spill - which could continue into August.
Then there's hurricane season - which is expected to be "very aggressive" and could once again put the focus on the government's preparedness, or lack thereof, for a natural disaster. Plus, don't forget all those other oil wells in the Gulf where the hurricanes blow.
There's also the possibility of a summertime terrorist attack which could certainly affect the midterms... and of course there's the economy. History suggests if unemployment is in double digits, that's bad news for the party in power. Right now we're hovering just below 10 percent. And we'll get a big jobs report on Friday.
Here’s my question to you: What stories will shape the debate going into the fall's midterm elections?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
2/3 of Americans support financial reform, but Senate GOP blocks it
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Here we go again. Yet another example of our representatives in Washington not listening to what the people want.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/04/27/art.brown.jpg caption="Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) talks with reporters after a vote on financial reform. Senate Democrats failed to bring legislation to the floor for debate in a 57-41 vote, unable to gain the 60 votes needed to overcome the threat of a Republican filibuster."]
Despite the fact that two-thirds of Americans support tougher regulation of banks and Wall Street... Republicans have already voted unanimously to block financial reform from reaching the senate floor - and they might do it again minutes from now when another test vote happens.
A new ABC News/Washington Post poll shows 65 percent of those surveyed want stricter financial reform. 31 percent are opposed.
The poll also shows majorities back two key parts of the senate bill... including greater government oversight of consumer loans... and a fund - paid for by the banks - that would help dismantle failing institutions. According to this poll, the public is split on letting the government regulate complex financial instruments knows as derivatives.
Also - by a double-digit margin, Americans trust Pres. Obama more than the Republicans in Congress to handle financial reform...
Not a huge surprise when you consider how the GOP is handing this. Although Republicans say they want a bill to pass... they say it needs to be "substantive" and they insist they won't be quote "rushed on another massive bill" by the Democrats. Top Republicans remain optimistic they can come to a bipartisan agreement.
Meanwhile, Majority Leader Harry Reid - who called another vote for this afternoon - says the Democrats won't tolerate efforts to water down the reform.
Here’s my question to you: Why are Senate Republicans blocking financial reform legislation when two-thirds of Americans want it done?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
What's behind GOP opposition to financial reform?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
You might call it "Health care reform, Take 2."
The financial reform bill might just set the stage for the next big partisan showdown on Capitol Hill.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/04/19/art.geithner.jpg caption="Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner spoke last week after meeting with Pres. Obama and the bipartisan Congressional leadership to discuss financial reform. "]
In what may be another political miscalculation by the GOP, all 41 Senate Republicans say they "are united" in opposing the current bill... and that they want to see a more "bipartisan and inclusive approach." Some have already promised to filibuster it.
Republicans claim the legislation would continue the Obama administration's intervention into formerly private industries.
Ironic when you consider that the original $700 billion TARP bailout happened under the Republican President Bush and his Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson... those hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars vanished into the pockets of the big banks with very few strings attached.
The Democrats claim the financial reform bill will actually prevent future taxpayer bailouts of failing banks. It would create a consumer protection office for investors, regulate some of the complex investments that led to the collapse, and create a $50 billion "failure fund" financed by the banks.
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner says he's confident the bill will pass Congress. And if Senate Democrats can nail down one or two Republican votes, some think that could open the flood gates for others to support it.
Even conservative columnist George Will believes in the end, there will be plenty of bipartisan support - he says the Republicans don't know what they want... and he estimates the bill will pass with 70 votes.
Here’s my question to you: What's behind the Republicans' opposition to financial reform?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Trips to risqué nightclubs and mailers with sex hotline numbers help GOP?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
It's been a bad week for the Republicans. Very bad.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/04/02/art.steele.jpg caption="Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele"]
The party of family values and morality started the week addressing revelations of RNC-funded trips to a risqué Hollywood nightclub that features bondage... and finished it off with mailers that mistakenly directed party members to a phone sex hotline.
At a time when Republicans could be capitalizing on dissatisfaction with the Democratic agenda in Washington, particularly health care reform... they're stuck talking about bondage and phone sex.
The RNC says chairman Michael Steele is ordering "substantive changes" to their accounting procedures. This comes after reports the RNC reimbursed a Republican donor almost $2,000 for a night out on the town in Los Angeles.
The evening included a trip to a club where topless dancers mimic sex and bondage acts. Is bondage a family value? Just asking.
It gets better. The RNC unintentionally sent a phone sex number on a fund-raising letter to potential donors. People who tried calling the number were offered "live, one-on-one talk with a nasty girl" for $3 a minute.
These PR nightmares are hurting the party in one of the worst ways possible, financially. The GOP needs to raise a lot of money for the upcoming midterm elections.
But one top social conservative leader... the president of the family research council... is calling on members to stop giving money to the national Republican Party. He says these incidents show the party is "completely tone-deaf" to the values and concerns of party members.
Here’s my question to you: How much do trips to risqué nightclubs and mailers with sex hotline numbers help the Republican Party?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
What does it say about the GOP in S.C. that they won't call for Sanford's resignation?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
The arrogance of South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford knows no bounds apparently. And the hypocrisy of the South Carolina Republican Party doesn't either. In the wake of his admission that he's been cheating on his wife, the state GOP voted to censure Sanford. Which amounts to looking the other way.
The reason for the censure was his secret travels to Argentina to visit his mistress, which officially translates into what the GOP is calling "Repeated failures to act in accordance with the party's core principles and beliefs."
One of those core principles is family values, except when it's inconvenient. Sanford also refuses to resign on his own, thus joining the soiled ranks of Larry Craig of Idaho and John Ensign of Nevada. Proud Republicans all.
Sanford also gets a slap on the wrist for falling below the standards expected of Republican elected officials. Deliberations reportedly went on for nearly four hours on a conference call and there were multiple rounds of balloting. This patty cake gesture on the part of the Party of family values is meaningless.
Just to be clear, Sanford's own party is saying they don't trust him and don't think he can effectively perform his duties as Governor; but it's okay with them if he continues in South Carolina's highest office. Pathetic.
Here’s my question to you: What does it say about the Republican Party in South Carolina that they won't call for Gov. Sanford's resignation?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
How will recent GOP sex scandals affect upcoming races?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
A couple of high-profile sex scandals were probably just about the last thing the Republican Party needed. This is the party of "family values," after all. First was Senator John Ensign of Nevada - who admitted to having an affair with a former staffer.
L to R: Sen. John Ensign (R-NV); Gov. Mark Sanford (R-SC); Sen. David Vitter (R-LA)
Next was South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford. After going AWOL for nearly a week - with staffers saying he was hiking the Appalachian Trail - Sanford admitted to an affair with a woman from Argentina. Both Ensign and Sanford had been considered 2012 presidential hopefuls.
Also, don't forget about Louisiana Senator David Vitter... who is still in the Senate despite calls for his resignation... after his phone number showed up in the records of the D.C. madam a couple years ago.
Some wonder how much damage these incidents will have on the GOP in the 2010 elections. After all, the sex scandals come at a time when the party has been trying to rebrand itself. Although Republicans certainly aren't alone in dealing with these scandals - see Democrats John Edwards or Eliot Spitzer - they do make life more difficult for the party of traditional, family values.
But, former Vice President Dick Cheney, for one, isn't too worried... he says the Republican 2012 bench remains strong. Cheney says the party has "got some great talents out there," and that "in adversity, there's opportunity." Cheney helped create the adversity the Republican party is trying to overcome.
Here’s my question to you: How much will recent Republican sex scandals affect upcoming races?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Why does the GOP have such a narrow appeal?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Here's something that probably keeps the leadership of the Republican Party up at night: A new Gallup poll shows 89 percent of the party's rank-and-file members are white.
Cafferty: GOP will not gain favorable support if Cheney, Limbaugh, and Gingrich continue to spew "negative, hateful rhetoric."
This leaves only 11 percent of Republicans who are Hispanics, African-Americans or members of other races. These numbers are staggering and hardly in keeping with the radically changing face of the U.S.
That's not all - by more than two-to-one, whites who call themselves Republicans claim a conservative ideology, and about half of them say they're strongly religious.
Compare that to Democrats - whose party is 64% white and 36 percent non-white. By a ratio of more than four-to-one, white Democrats call themselves moderate or liberal, and only 20 percent of them say they're highly religious.
Independents land somewhere between the two camps - with 27 percent non-whites.
These numbers pretty much say it all about the GOP's troubles; and leave little question why Democrats are in control of the White House and both houses of Congress.
The big question: Will the support of white, conservative, religious Americans be enough of a base for Republicans to start winning elections again? Probably not. The alternative is for Republicans to find a way to broaden their appeal among non-whites and whites who are more moderate.
And here's a hint: The way to accomplish that is probably not with the likes of Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich slinging around negative and hateful rhetoric.
Here’s my question to you: Why does the Republican Party have such a narrow appeal?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
How can GOP attract more women?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
And now for today's installment of 'The Republican Party is in deep trouble'... Among their many issues - turns out the GOP is really hurting when it comes to women voters. A new Gallup poll shows that among women, Democrats have a solid double-digit advantage in party identification over Republicans - 41 percent to 27 percent.
Compare that to men, who are pretty evenly divided - 30 percent identify as Democrats and 28 percent as Republicans.
The news is even worse for the GOP when you take into account independent women who lean Democratic... in that case the advantage is 57 percent to 35 percent for the Democrats.
Meanwhile the Republicans may want to take some advice from Colin Powell, who says they are in big trouble and need to find a way to move back to the center. The former Secretary of State says the party is "getting smaller and smaller," which isn't good for the country.
He says Republicans need to realize the country has changed, that Americans want to pay taxes for services and are looking for more government in their life.
Also, Powell is criticizing some party leaders for bowing too much to the right; and says right wing commentators like Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter don't serve their party well. He says he doesn't want Republicans to turn into Democrats, but instead to build a vibrant party.
Hint: that may be one way to get more women to support them.
Here’s my question to you: What should the Republican Party do to attract more women voters?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Mistake for some in GOP to call Democrats 'Socialists'?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
It seems like some Republicans still haven't realized that they lost big-time last November because the American people are sick and tired of their style of politics. And here's Exhibit A: a conservative faction of the Republican National Committee wants the party to brand Democrats as Socialists.
Some RNC members argue Pres. Obama wants to restructure U.S. society upon socialist ideals.
Politico reports RNC member James Bopp, Jr. of Indiana is accusing President Obama of wanting to restructure American society along socialist ideals, saying: "Just as President Reagan's identification of the Soviet Union as the evil 'empire' galvanized opposition to Communism, we hope that the accurate depiction of the Democrats as a Socialist Party will galvanize opposition to their march to Socialism."
16 RNC members agreed to the resolution and are petitioning Chairman Michael Steele to set a special meeting to consider it. An RNC spokesman wouldn't say what Steele thinks about all this, but a memo from earlier this month suggests that while he agrees with hardliners who say the president is leading the country toward socialism, he's probably not going to make it official party policy.
And it's not just Democrats who they're after - Bopp also wanted to criticize the three Republicans who supported the stimulus package: Senators Arlen Specter, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins. But that effort was apparently watered down - the resolution instead praises those in the party who have opposed bailouts and Democratic spending plans.
Several Republicans threw around the "socialist" label during last year's campaign; and more recently Congressman Spencer Bachus of Alabama claimed there were 17 socialists in Congress. None of this seems like the best way for the party to attract voters.
Here’s my question to you: Is it a mistake for some Republicans to try and brand Democrats as 'Socialists'?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Why are some in GOP calling for support of gay marriage?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
As gay marriage legislation continues to pick up steam in several states, some Republicans are now calling on their party to get behind the movement. A top adviser to John McCain's presidential campaign warns that the GOP will keep losing young voters and the Northeast as long as they oppose same-sex marriages.
Meghan McCain (left) and Steve Schmidt (right) agree that it is harmful to the GOP for candidates to be perceived as anti-gay.
Steve Schmidt told a meeting of a gay rights group called the Log Cabin Republicans that it's harmful for GOP candidates to be seen as anti-gay in places like California, Washington and New York. Schmidt - who has a lesbian sister - called heterosexual marriage "a tradition, not a creed," and dismissed arguments from conservatives that allowing gay marriage would weaken the institution or that it could turn the GOP into a "sectarian party." Nonetheless, he acknowledged that he's unlikely to find support from many in his party in the near future.
One Republican who does agree is John McCain's daughter, Meghan. She addressed the same group over the weekend, saying there's "a war brewing in the Republican party" between the past and the future. Meghan McCain says that embracing new technology - like Twitter or Facebook - won't solve the party's problems; instead, the party needs to break free from "obsolete positions." Her dad must be loving this.
Earlier last week, John McCain's daughter had written an opinion piece called 'Memo to the GOP: Go Gay' urging Republicans to "get past our anti-gay rhetoric" if they want to gain significant support from younger voters. At a time when only one in four voters identifies themselves as a Republican, some are suggesting the perceived intolerance of the party on issues like gay marriage is costing them dearly.
Here’s my question to you: Why are some Republicans calling on their party to support same-sex marriage?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
@jackcafferty on Twitter
Recent Comments