WEEKLY SPOTLIGHT: Rasmussen Poll Data Based, Analysis and commentary: The Precinct Master. Ed. Dickau
This report/post should not be taken lightly or considered alarmist.
We are current living in the most volatile political climate since the Vietnam War, and the fact that riots have not broken out in the streets and buildings have not yet been burned should be of little comfort because the seething voter rage and pent up polarization generated by the Bush Regime and the Iraq War fiasco, will at some, not too distant time, erupt suddenly.
All the business as usual punditry and “politically correct” formula analysis of what condition this nation is in are irrelevant. We are in an “Ostrich Syndrome”, our heads buried in the sands of Iraq and the manure pile of Bushit, trying to ignore reality except on TV reality shows, with our asses expose for a proper surprise ass kicking from violence in the streets, some new international crisis fabricated, provoked by the administration, or an expression of voter rage at the polls that renders all of the current campaigning hype, polling, punditry and media tabloid news reporting as totally fallacious as the reasons for our involvement in Iraq.
Our system of government and social stability are slowly oozing blood from multiple untended wounds. For all those who believe: “It Can’t Happen Here”, or “Nothing Will Change, Nothing Will Happen; We just Have To Wait Out Bush”; I have to say to the former: “It is happening; and to the latter: “Your Myopic Cynicism will cost you and this nation dearly.”
Support for Senate Immigration Bill Falls, 49% Prefer No Bill At All
Public support for the Senate immigration reform bill has slipped a bit over the past week. A Rasmussen Reports poll conducted Monday and Tuesday night found that just 23% of voters now support the bill while 50% are opposed. Last week, 26% supported the Senate bill while 48% were opposed.
All the business as usual punditry and “politically correct” formula analysis of what condition this nation is in are irrelevant. We are in an “Ostrich Syndrome”, our heads buried in the sands of Iraq and the manure pile of Bushit, trying to ignore reality except on TV reality shows, with our asses expose for a proper surprise ass kicking from violence in the streets, some new international crisis fabricated, provoked by the administration, or an expression of voter rage at the polls that renders all of the current campaigning hype, polling, punditry and media tabloid news reporting as totally fallacious as the reasons for our involvement in Iraq.
Our system of government and social stability are slowly oozing blood from multiple untended wounds. For all those who believe: “It Can’t Happen Here”, or “Nothing Will Change, Nothing Will Happen; We just Have To Wait Out Bush”; I have to say to the former: “It is happening; and to the latter: “Your Myopic Cynicism will cost you and this nation dearly.”
Support for Senate Immigration Bill Falls, 49% Prefer No Bill At All
Public support for the Senate immigration reform bill has slipped a bit over the past week. A Rasmussen Reports poll conducted Monday and Tuesday night found that just 23% of voters now support the bill while 50% are opposed. Last week, 26% supported the Senate bill while 48% were opposed.
In the face of public opposition, some supporters of the legislation have argued that the compromise may not be perfect but doing something is better than doing nothing. Voters have a different view--a solid plurality believes it would be better for the country to pass no bill at this time rather than letting the Senate compromise become law.
More..
TOP STORIES
GOP NOMINATION: Rudy Down, Thompson in Second, McCain Falls to Fourth With former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson taking his first formal steps towards a Presidential run and the immigration debate creating challenges for Arizona Senator John McCain, the race for the Republican Presidential nomination has an entirely different look this week.
More..
Opposition to Stricter Gun Control Rebounds Following Virginia Tech Tragedy The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 43% now believe stricter gun control laws are needed. Forty-nine percent (49%) disagree and say the country does not need stricter gun control laws. That reflects a big change in the weeks since the tragedy at Virginia Tech.
More..
THE REALLY SCAREY THOUGHT OF THE WEEK: BECAUSE….
Electoral Chaos: How Michael Bloomberg Could Deadlock Both the Electoral College and the House of Representatives.
Rumors abound that Michael Bloomberg might spend a billion dollars running for the White House as an Independent, putting him on a competitive footing with the major party candidates. That might make it possible for Bloomberg to win several states and prevent anybody from winning a majority of the Electoral College votes.
More.. (INSERT NOW)
Friday, June 01, 2007
Rumors abound that Michael Bloomberg might spend a billion dollars running for the White House as an Independent, putting him on a competitive footing with the major party candidates. That might make it possible for Bloomberg to win several states and prevent anybody from winning a majority of the Electoral College votes. The House of Representatives would then select a President, something that hasn’t happened since 1824.
The few political commentators who have considered this possibility dismiss its significance. They reason that since Democrats control the House, the Democratic candidate would automatically move into the White House. That assessment reflects a profound misunderstanding of the process outlined in the Constitution.
If no candidate wins a majority in the Electoral College, the top three candidates are submitted to the House of Representatives. Presumably, this would be a Democrat, a Republican, and Bloomberg. (see polling data) (INSERT NOW)
National Survey of 1,000 Likely VotersMay 30, 2007
How likely is it that you would consider voting for Michael Bloomberg as an independent candidate for President?
Very likely -7%
Somewhat likely -20%
Not very likely -32%
Not at all likely -28%
Not sure -13%
27% Likely to Vote for Bloomberg as Third Party Candidate
Friday, June 01, 2007
It’s been 147 years since a “third-party” candidate won the White House. That man, Abe Lincoln is known to history for many things including becoming the first Republican President. Since it hasn’t happened in 147 years, any discussion about third-party campaigns must include the phrase “long-shot.”
Still, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg may be considering such a campaign and is reportedly willing to spend a billion dollars to get his message out. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone poll found that 27% of American voters would be Somewhat (20%) or Very (7%) likely to vote for Bloomberg.
An even larger number—39%--would consider voting for Bloomberg vote under the right circumstances. Just 28% would not vote for him while 33% are not sure.
These numbers suggest that if Bloomberg can find a message that resonates, he might win some states and deny either major party candidate a majority in the Electoral College. That could lead to Electoral Chaos by creating a deadlock in both the Electoral College and the House of Representatives. Such a process would be unprecedented and unpredictable, sure to be studied by historians and political scientists for generations. There’s also an outside chance it could lead to a President Bloomberg.
If Bloomberg somehow found himself in second place as Election 2008 progresses, the dynamics get even more interesting. Remember, Ross Perot was second in the polls six months before the 1992 campaign. But, then he dropped out of the race for a period of time before re-entering the fray. He never regained his earlier status but still wound up with 19% of the vote.
In 2008, if it became clear that the Republican candidate couldn’t win, 46% of all voters say they’d pull the lever for Bloomberg over New York Senator Hillary Clinton (D). Just 37% would vote for Clinton. If the Democratic candidate couldn’t win, 35% of voters would prefer former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani while 34% would prefer Bloomberg.
Bloomberg is contemplating running at a time when the brand names of the two major parties is not doing well --the number of people considering themselves Republicans has dropped to the lowest level of the Bush era and the number of Democrats has just declined to the lowest level in seventeen months.
And the Politicos, Candidates, Pundits and Know It Alls still haven't grasped the silent, at the moment, VOTER RAGE, that is ready to spring like a cat in the dark!
If the Mayor were to spend some of his money developing a potentially competitive third party, 49% of voters say they’d consider voting for a Congressional candidate supported by Bloomberg. Only 18% would not consider a Bloomberg Congressional candidate.
If he goes that route, 54% would want the Mayor to recruit business and community leaders as Congressional candidates. Only 11% would rather see him recruit those who have held office in other parties.
All of this is pure speculation, of course. Today, just 7% of Americans say they’ve followed stories of a potential Bloomberg candidacy very closely. The whole concept is a blank slate. Earlier head-to-head polling found Bloomberg struggling to reach double digits in national polls, although he has polled as high as 23% in New Jersey.
Nobody knows who the major parties will nominate and no one can realistically project the impact of a billion dollar campaign. It’s also unclear what sort of message Bloomberg might articulate. If he simply promised to be a better manager than the other candidates, it’s hard to see how he’d have much impact.
It’s also hard to see how Bloomberg could set himself apart from other candidates on the situation in Iraq. On immigration, he would have some flexibility so long as he demonstrated a serious commitment to enforcing the border and reducing illegal immigration. But, again, that is unlikely to set him apart from other candidates.
However, if Bloomberg credibly adopted a theme getting voters back into the national theme of checks and balances that might change the equation.
The Rasmussen Reports national telephone poll found that 44% of all voters say they’d be more likely to vote for Bloomberg if he supported initiative rights so that important issues could be placed on the ballot for voters to decide directly. That would turn off just 16% of potential voters.
The results are similar (41% to 21%) if Bloomberg were to support a proposal requiring all tax increases to be approved by voters. Sixty-two percent (62%) of all voters favor this policy and only 18% are opposed. Traditional party politicians, however, tend to resist giving voters more power through initiative and tax approval approaches.
Thirty-five percent (35%) say they’d be more likely to vote for Bloomberg if he were to build a true third party rather than just make an ego-driven run for the White House.
But, when all is said and done, Americans have their doubts about a possible third party candidate. Just 23% believe it’s possible for Bloomberg to be elected—even after being told he would spend a billion dollars on the campaign. Forty-three percent (43%) say it is not possible while 34% are not sure. So, assuming he can find the right campaign theme, Bloomberg’s biggest challenge might be convincing voters he has a chance to win.
The House would then vote, but the result would not be determined by the overall number of Representatives. According to the Constitution, each state gets to cast one vote… and a majority of all the states is required to select a President. That means a candidate needs to get the nod from 26 state delegations before moving into the White House.
Today, the Democrats control precisely 26 state delegations. Republicans control 21 and 3 are tied. But, many are closely divided. If the Democrats lose a single state delegation, they lose the majority needed to select a President on their own.
In at least 12 state delegations currently controlled by Democrats, the loss of a single representative would either shift control to the Republicans or create a deadlock. If the Democrats lose just a single net seat in any one of those twelve states, they lose control of the ability to select the next President in the House.
If a Bloomberg campaign resonates with the public enough to win several states; his candidacy could create a deadlock in both the Electoral College and the House of Representatives. Certainly his strategists would recognize this and target the most vulnerable Democrats in key states to assure such an outcome.
What happens if nobody controls a majority of the state delegations in the House? It’s hard to tell, but whatever happens would be studied by historians and political scientists for generations.
There would certainly be an unprecedented and intense period of negotiations between Election Day and January 20. A deal could be reached prior to the Electoral College voting. Or, it could go to the House (with the Senate called upon to select a Vice President).
The possibilities are too numerous and speculative to consider here, but it is hard to overstate the leverage that Bloomberg would hold. If he finishes a strong second in the national popular vote, that leverage would be limited only by his desire to use it. There is even a decent chance he could wind up as President.
To give just one extreme example of the possible negotiating tactics, remember that the vote for Vice President is held separately from the vote for President. If Bloomberg really played hardball, his team could cast their Electoral Votes for, say, the Republican Vice-Presidential candidate. By electing a Republican Vice-President, Bloomberg would put tremendous pressure on the Democrats to negotiate with him.
The results are similar (41% to 21%) if Bloomberg were to support a proposal requiring all tax increases to be approved by voters. Sixty-two percent (62%) of all voters favor this policy and only 18% are opposed. Traditional party politicians, however, tend to resist giving voters more power through initiative and tax approval approaches.
Thirty-five percent (35%) say they’d be more likely to vote for Bloomberg if he were to build a true third party rather than just make an ego-driven run for the White House.
But, when all is said and done, Americans have their doubts about a possible third party candidate. Just 23% believe it’s possible for Bloomberg to be elected—even after being told he would spend a billion dollars on the campaign. Forty-three percent (43%) say it is not possible while 34% are not sure. So, assuming he can find the right campaign theme, Bloomberg’s biggest challenge might be convincing voters he has a chance to win.
The House would then vote, but the result would not be determined by the overall number of Representatives. According to the Constitution, each state gets to cast one vote… and a majority of all the states is required to select a President. That means a candidate needs to get the nod from 26 state delegations before moving into the White House.
Today, the Democrats control precisely 26 state delegations. Republicans control 21 and 3 are tied. But, many are closely divided. If the Democrats lose a single state delegation, they lose the majority needed to select a President on their own.
In at least 12 state delegations currently controlled by Democrats, the loss of a single representative would either shift control to the Republicans or create a deadlock. If the Democrats lose just a single net seat in any one of those twelve states, they lose control of the ability to select the next President in the House.
If a Bloomberg campaign resonates with the public enough to win several states; his candidacy could create a deadlock in both the Electoral College and the House of Representatives. Certainly his strategists would recognize this and target the most vulnerable Democrats in key states to assure such an outcome.
What happens if nobody controls a majority of the state delegations in the House? It’s hard to tell, but whatever happens would be studied by historians and political scientists for generations.
There would certainly be an unprecedented and intense period of negotiations between Election Day and January 20. A deal could be reached prior to the Electoral College voting. Or, it could go to the House (with the Senate called upon to select a Vice President).
The possibilities are too numerous and speculative to consider here, but it is hard to overstate the leverage that Bloomberg would hold. If he finishes a strong second in the national popular vote, that leverage would be limited only by his desire to use it. There is even a decent chance he could wind up as President.
To give just one extreme example of the possible negotiating tactics, remember that the vote for Vice President is held separately from the vote for President. If Bloomberg really played hardball, his team could cast their Electoral Votes for, say, the Republican Vice-Presidential candidate. By electing a Republican Vice-President, Bloomberg would put tremendous pressure on the Democrats to negotiate with him.
WHY? BECAUSE IF THE HOUSE REMAINS DEADLOCKED ON JANUARY 20, THE ALREADY ELECTED REPUBLICAN VICE PRESIDENT WOULD ASSUME THE ROLE OF PRESIDENT.
This, of course, is not a likely scenario. But, if Michael Bloomberg is truly serious about investing a billion dollars in a Presidential campaign—and if he can find a message that truly resonates with the American people--he has the potential to fundamentally alter Election 2008 in ways we can’t begin to imagine.
(SERIOUS ACCIDENTS DO HAPPEN, AND WE ARE IN AN EXTREMELY VOLATILE STATE WHERE AN EXPLOSION COULD HAPPEN AT ANY MINUTE.)
The Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution altered Article II pertaining to presidential elections. Article Two stated that the U.S. Electoral College would elect both the President and the Vice President in a single election; the person with a majority would become President and the runner-up would become Vice President.
This, of course, is not a likely scenario. But, if Michael Bloomberg is truly serious about investing a billion dollars in a Presidential campaign—and if he can find a message that truly resonates with the American people--he has the potential to fundamentally alter Election 2008 in ways we can’t begin to imagine.
(SERIOUS ACCIDENTS DO HAPPEN, AND WE ARE IN AN EXTREMELY VOLATILE STATE WHERE AN EXPLOSION COULD HAPPEN AT ANY MINUTE.)
The Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution altered Article II pertaining to presidential elections. Article Two stated that the U.S. Electoral College would elect both the President and the Vice President in a single election; the person with a majority would become President and the runner-up would become Vice President.
Problems with this system were demonstrated by the election of 1796 and, more spectacularly, the election of 1800. The Twelfth Amendment, proposed by the U.S. Congress on December 9, 1803 and ratified by the requisite number of state legislatures on June 15, 1804, required electors to cast two distinct votes: one for President and another for Vice President.
CONTENTS
1 Text
2 Voting for President and Vice-President under the original Article II
3 Electoral College under Amendment XII
4 Elections 1804–present
5 References
5.1 Bibliography
6 External links
THE TEXT OF THE 12TH AMENDMENT READS AS FOLLOWS:
“-The people shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate.
The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;
The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President.
CONTENTS
1 Text
2 Voting for President and Vice-President under the original Article II
3 Electoral College under Amendment XII
4 Elections 1804–present
5 References
5.1 Bibliography
6 External links
THE TEXT OF THE 12TH AMENDMENT READS AS FOLLOWS:
“-The people shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate.
The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;
The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President.
But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice.
And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as the President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.
And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as the President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.
(THAT WOULD BE CHENEY... IF WE HAVE IMPEACHED AND CONVICTED HIM BY THEN.)
The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
ELECTORAL COLLEGE UNDER AMENDMENT XII
The amendment, which applied to elections beginning in 1804, did not change the composition of the Electoral College. Rather, it amended the process whereby the Electoral College, or in some cases the House of Representatives, chooses the President.
Under the Twelfth Amendment, electors must cast distinct votes for President and Vice President, instead of two votes for President. No Elector may cast votes for Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates who both inhabit the same state as the Elector. It is, however, possible for an Elector to cast his votes for candidates from the same state, if that state is different from the Elector's.
The Twelfth Amendment explicitly precluded from being Vice President those ineligible to be President: people under thirty-five years of age, those who have not inhabited the United States for at least fourteen years, and those who are not natural-born citizens. It is unclear if the Twenty-second Amendment's term-limiting provisions prevent two-term Presidents from becoming Vice Presidents (see that article for a fuller discussion).
A majority of electoral votes is still required for one to be deemed elected President or Vice President. When nobody has a majority, the House of Representatives, voting by states and with the same quorum requirements as under Article II, chooses a President. The Twelfth Amendment allows the House to consider no more than three candidates, compared to five under the original constitution.
The Senate, similarly, may choose the Vice President if no candidate has received a majority of electoral votes. Its choice is limited to those with the "two highest numbers" of electoral votes. (If multiple individuals are tied for second place, the Senate may consider all of them, in addition to the individual with the greatest number of votes.) The Twelfth Amendment introduced a quorum requirement of two-thirds for the conduct of balloting. Furthermore, the Twelfth Amendment provides that the votes of a majority of Senators are required to arrive at a choice; In the case of a 50/50 tie the President of the Senate, THE SITTING VICE PRESIDENT, will cast the deciding vote.
In order to prevent deadlocks from keeping the nation leaderless, the Twelfth Amendment provided that if the House could not choose a President before March 4 (at that time the first day of a Presidential term), the individual elected Vice President would act as President until one could be chosen by the House. The Twentieth Amendment changed the date for the commencement of Presidential terms to January 20 and permits Congress to direct, through legislation, which officer should act as President if both houses of Congress are deadlocked.
AMENDMENT XX
Sec. 3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.
2008 DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY:
Clinton 34% Obama 26% Edwards 15% .
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone poll of the Democratic Presidential nominating competition shows New York Senator Hillary Clinton at 34%, Illinois Senator Barack Obama at 26%, and former North Carolina Senator John Edwards at 15%.
More..
27% LIKELY TO VOTE FOR BLOOMBERG AS THIRD PARTY CANDIDATE
It’s been 147 years since a “third-party” candidate won the White House. That man, Abe Lincoln is known to history for many things including becoming the first Republican President. Since it hasn’t happened in 147 years, any discussion about third-party campaigns must include the phrase “long-shot.”
More..
Anything is possible at this moment in this country. Just look at what happens everyday! Ed.
![[PDA - Progressive Democrats of America - Stand Up. Take Action. Vote.]](http://pdamerica.org/images/ads/pdalink-150x200.gif)
No comments:
Post a Comment