Lots of reading for your political eyes.
In Politics Daily, the author looks at the Congressional race in Nebraska’s second district, and gets all hot and bothered that Lee Terry doesn’t brag optimism about his race.
Sure, some pols will tell you, “I’ve got it in the bag,” but what does that do to your supporters? Encourage them to stop canvassing the neighborhood and stay home on Election Day, that’s what. So we won’t get excited about Lee being his usual cautious self.
Beyond all the rest, what was interesting was Tom White’s “flim flam” about the TARP bailout.
You will remember that White’s recent TV ad says,
“Terry voted for wasteful spending, like the Wall Street bailout…”
Uh…but when actually trying to nail down White on this issue, what do we hear?
“I don’t deny that saving the financial system was critical,” he said with a bit of inadvertent understatement. “It was and it did. But what was done was done very poorly – and, of course, it was done under the Bush administration. And they did not control where that money went . . . There’s a lot to legitimately criticize about TARP and his vote, while still recognizing the necessity of saving the financial system.” Parse that answer – if you can.
OK, let us parse away!
“Saving the financial system was CRITICAL.”
“(The TARP vote) was (critical)…”
“(The TARP vote) did (save the financial system).”
So, Terry’s “wasteful” vote was critical, and it saved America.
Well, then thanks for clearing that up, Tom White.
And this clear-as-mud response is one reason why you’re no longer on the Democrat’s most favored list.
What’s that? Well…
If you read CQ Politics, you can see that the Terry-White race is not on many analysts’ radar:
Aside from GOP Reps. Anh “Joseph” Cao (La.) and Charles K. Djou (Hawaii) — both of whom represent heavily Democratic districts — there are three Republican Members whom Democrats believe they have a chance of defeating in November. They are Lungren and Reps. Dave Reichert(Wash.) and Charlie Dent (Pa.).
(We will give you a second to search for Lee Terry’s name there. You good? Good.)
And for an analysis of Nebraska’s Second District, the AP has done a little research.
You can find an interesting review of the trend for voters to register as Independent, rather than Republican or Democrat in the Omaha area.
Tom White’s campaign man, Ian Russell, spun it that Republican Primary Matt Sakalosky voters,
…could turn to White, whom Russell called “an independent leader” and “a fiscal conservative.”
Riiiiight. THAT’s where they’ll turn. To the Democrat who supports ObamaCare at the trillion dollar stimulus. Uh huh.
But for a more critical analysis of the trend, look no further than Terry’s Manager, David Boomer:
Turnout among unaffiliated voters tends to drop in mid-cycle election years, he said, as it did in 2006, when about 32 percent of nonpartisan voters cast ballots — compared with nearly half of all registered voters that year. Terry garnered about half of the independent vote in 2008 — a year when nonpartisan voters across the country cast ballots 2-to-1 for Democratic President Barack Obama, Boomer said.
“If the Democrats could win every independent voter in November — and the turnout is the same as it was in 2006 — it would still come out even … and that’s not going to happen,” he said.
Terry’s campaign has also been targeting independent voters this year, Boomer said.
“If there’s a nonpartisan voter out there who is likely to vote in November, they’ve heard from us four, five or six times this summer,” he said.
That’s just a little more definite than, “we hope Sakalosky’s people vote for the Democrat”, eh?
Finally, 3rd District Congressman Adrian Smith, has this request to YOU, to help ID wasteful spending:
This is actually fairly interesting. Smith notes,
We are launching an experiment – the first YouCut Citizen Review of a government agency. Together, we will identify wasteful spending that should be cut and begin to hold agencies accountable for how they are spending your money.
First, we will take a look at the National Science Foundation (NSF) – Congress created the NSF in 1950 to promote the progress of science.
For this purpose, NSF makes more than 10,000 new grant awards annually, many of these grants fund worthy research in the hard sciences.
Recently, however NSF has funded some more questionable projects – $750,000 to develop computer models to analyze the on-field contributions of soccer players and $1.2 million to model the sound of objects breaking for use by the video game industry.
Help us identify grants that are wasteful or that you don’t think are a good use of taxpayer dollars.
(Now if we can only figure out a way to swing some-a-that soccer cash, we’d be singing a different tune…)
Hey and, superficially, Smith’s delivery on this was good, huh? Nice work.