Interesting article as the starter for a discussion but somewhat deficient in analysis. By the time the American political news gets to Aussie it is reduced to one of three topics. What has the President (either party) said today (2) has there been any real or perceived scandal uncovered and three has the opposition scored any political knock downs in the perennial debate.
Clinton is well known here as the wife of a good president who suffered from the disease common to so many powerful men. A zipper on his pants which his mother should have had permanently welded shut. During that particular scandal, Monica Lewinski was better known here than the first lady. Her service as Sec State has brought Ms Clinton to the notice of the Australian public and I believe she is well regarded here. The recent change in Australian government may perhaps cloud her image as there is a strong Conservative feeling throughout the land. Two weeks ago Tasmania threw out a Socialist (Dem) government which had been in power for 14 long years. South Australia came within one seat of doing the same. In fact S.A. now relies on one independent to maintain the Labor party in government.
What is obvious to Australians is the inevitability of Mrs. Clinton securing the Democratic Party nomination. It is further recognized that as with the last Presidential bun fight, the Republicans will tear themselves apart in the battle to secure the nomination. I do have trouble however in accepting at this stage that Rand Paul is the likely opponent for Clinton. Christie and Ben Carson, the latter still undecided about running, are possibilities perhaps.
Now, I realize that I am being somewhat controversial today but if I rile other readers here I apologize .My hope is that you will rebut my argument with factual responses which will enhance my understanding of your Politics.
So then, the final and perhaps most important factor in getting a change in Government, believe me I do think a change is needed! If for a moment we forget to label certain sections of the Republican movement there may be a chance. Unfortunately I can see only the extremists on the right, well intentioned as they undoubtedly are, pulling down the chances of whichever candidate is chosen.
You will notice that my avatar is a creature native to Australia. I adopted this after a discussion on the old Market Watch with a bloke I upset just a little. He suggested I” go stuff a Wombat”. So please choose another animal if you want to” get stuck in” I am quite fond of my little Hairy nosed wombat!
K, Hillary Clinton isn’t expected to announce her intentions about a presidential bid until after the midterm elections, but it’s already a real possibility she won’t face any real opposition if she decides to run.
California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) told reporters yesterday he wasn’t going to run. He joins Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) who said late last year she wouldn’t be a candidate either.
Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley (D) clearly wants to run, but has said he won’t if Clinton is a candidate. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) is also thought to have ambitions for higher office but almost no one thinks he would challenge Clinton.
Vice President Joe Biden clearly wants another chance and has been keeping up his political travel over the last year. But nearly every early poll shows him losing to Clinton by a wide margin.
Former Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer (D) clearly enjoys talking about running for president, but he did the same about running for U.S. Senate last year and ultimately decided against it.
Of course, there are always candidates who run simply for the attention and publicity. Dennis Kucinich or Al Sharpton or Mike Gravel may announce their candidacies in a hope to get on stage in a nationally-televised debate. But if Clinton is the only serious candidate running, will there even be any televised debates?
"Unfortunately I can see only the extremists on the right, well intentioned as they undoubtedly are, pulling down the chances of whichever candidate is chosen."
Thanks for that.
While working in Australia I got quite close to a family that lived in Penrith, a suburb of Sidney. One weekend they took me to one of those native species petting zoos in the Blue Mountains. While there, Ben their son, leaned back against a wombat pen. Before anyone know, the wombat had chewed a hole in the back of his jacket... good thing it was realized then... it could have been the seat of his pants.
Could you explain what you mean by extremists? Are you saying that main stream republicans well go to the mate to preserve their power base and Tea Party types will do the same for their chosen candidate or are you indicating that some groups have extreme but well intentioned views that should be eyed with critical suspicion? If it is the later, which ones.
Scott. My thanks and please refer to the post of rick below. Rick has pretty much summed up the situation as I see it at the end of the long public bloodbath which was the fight for the last Republican nomination. So many candidates started and each had his own power base within the party. There was much prominence given to the tea party splinter group and the public I think became a bit sick of the circus which developed during such a protracted campaign, not for the office of POTUS, but for the nomination to contest the Presidential election.
So to your question, or are you indicating that some groups have extreme but well intentioned views that should be eyed with critical suspicion? If it is the later, which ones. Obviously the Tea Party group is the most extreme and the noisiest. I have feeling that main stream America prefers a more moderate approach. I get the opportunity to speak to many Americans here, I never let an opportunity pass without speaking to the owner of an American accent and in general they are prepared to give me their opinion on most subjects. All agree with me that the Tea Party is genuine and sincere in their beliefs
For two or three years I have noted a reluctance to rock the boat, both Dems and Repubs seem to be looking for a moderate, perhaps just a little hawkish but this could be the hormones kicking in when I talk about the national psyche.
I have also noted great ignorance about Politics in your country, so many tell me, with pride, they do not vote.
K, What's laughable is how much credence the media and the left has put into Hillary. 2 years as a senator. 4 years as Secretary of State. First lady for 8 years. Wife of a governor Light weight attorney.
The Dem's have numerous candidates to chose from but prefer an obama clone in experience. The best part, they will have nothing to say when the debt kills the country as they have been a large part of it.
Oh, sorry, I forgot, it's Bush's fault. Very reminiscent of our current president light of credentials but this seems to be what America is all about. Want free, vote for me.
Now you know why the majority of American do not vote which swings the election to the leftists in government. Many cannot just hold their nose and vote for one of the smelly parties.
Time for change we can believe in and it's neither of the popular monied parties.
I will agree that it's time for a change, but I don't see any Republican candidates who have more governmental experience than Clinton. Your efforts to demonize the Democrats, and liberals in general strikes me as rather amusing. As Rand Paul once said: "Democrats, Republicans, not a dime's worth of difference".
It was Ron, not Rand: "We don’t have a good democratic process," Paul said. "What happens if you come to the conclusion, as millions of Americans have, these parties aren’t different, they’re all the same. The monetary policy stays the same. The welfare system stays the same. The foreign policy stays the same. They get pretty disgusted. There is but one party."
I would vote for Jeb Bush, not because he is dynastic (George H. W., George W., Jeb, George P., etc) but because I thought he was a fine Governor of Florida. Is 2 a dynasty, how many does it take?
What's laughable lou is that you are so out of touch that you don't know that Clinton served a full 6 years in the senate and 2 years of a second term. You and William will talk endlessly of the dems lack of experience but would put your vote tomorrow on a guy with a whole lot less. Scott walker has not rescued Wisconsin. He had a widely publicized cut to state salaries and collective bargaining but his state is still billions in debt. All he did was cost Wisconsin millions in Federal funds that the residents of the state now must make up.
The states that selected the Federal Government money get free for 3 years then they are on the hook for 10% of medicaid cost. Most state budgets are strained now they can just pony up the additional 10% until the Federal Government makes it more. Who's smarter? The governors that chose the free money today ignoring the cost of more in 3 years of the governor who said his state couldn't afford more?
That reality is 2.5 years away. Like many democrats you are a grasshopper while the ants work away.
As to Walker: Governor Scott Walker’s budget turned a $3.6 billion state deficit into a surplus. Wisconsin was facing one of the largest deficits in state history. Governor Walker’s budget projects a surplus for the first time in over 15 years (i). * Includes outstanding debts, agency budget requests, and other shortfalls. See #13.
#2 For the first time in six years, school tax levies are down. According to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau, the total K-12 tax levy decreased by more than $47 million for the 2011-2012 school year, following reforms. For five years prior to Governor Walker’s reforms, the statewide average school levy tax increased $220 million per year (ii) for a total of $1.1 BILLION dollars.
#3 Without reforms, homeowners would have paid hundreds of dollars more in property taxes this year. With Governor Walker’s reforms, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau, the typical homeowner will save $419 over the next two years (iii). When you include additional reforms, the savings rise to $710.
#4 Governor Walker’s budget protects health care coverage for seniors and the neediest families in the state. Due to the loss of one-time federal stimulus funds and unsustainable program expansions Governor Walker faced a projected $1.8 billion deficit in the state’s Medicaid budget (iv). Governor Walker’s budget protected seniors and the neediest families by investing $1.2 billion in new state funds for Medicaid. This was by far the largest one-time investment of state funds into Medicaid. Facing a huge state deficit, Governor Walker’s budget protects SeniorCare, FamilyCare, and the disabled by not dropping seniors or disabled individuals from coverage.
#5 The Governor’s reforms helped balance the budget while still offering employees a generous pension plan. Prior to the Governor’s reforms, state employees paid little or nothing to be part of the Wisconsin Retirement System (pension) plan (xi). Payments to public employee pensions neared $1.5 billion in 2010(v). Of that amount, public employees contributed $12 million. The Governor’s reforms require most state employees to pay approximately half of their pension contribution – or 5.8%. (Some employees, including the Governor, pay more.) According to a report by the Wisconsin Policy Institute: (vi) • Only 51% of private sector employees participate in a retirement plan. • On average, private sector employers contribute 5.3% of payroll (matched by employee) for retirement plans. Before reforms, contributions to the state WRS plan were about 12%. By comparison, retirement benefits for state employees are much more generous than those offered in the private sector. • According to the Wisconsin Policy Institute report, a 25-year state employee earning $48,000/year will have the same estimated retirement income as a private sector employee earning $70,000/year. • General state employees with 30 years of service can retire as early as age 57 with full pension benefits. Only 6% of private sector employers offer early retirement benefits. A recent Taxpayer Alliance study projected that even with higher pension contributions, Wisconsin teacher benefits will be 20% higher than the national average (vii).
#6 The Governor’s reforms improve education in the state, particularly in the districts utilizing the tools that are now available to them. According to a survey by the Wisconsin Association of School District Administrators released by DPI: • New teacher hires outnumber layoffs and non-renewals by 1,799 positions (viii). • The three districts with the most teacher layoffs (Milwaukee, Kenosha, and Janesville) didn’t adopt the reforms put in place by Governor Walker. Those districts account for 68% of teacher layoffs for the entire state, but only contain 12.8% of Wisconsin students (ix). • 75% of districts have the same K-3 class sizes or are decreasing them • 67% of districts have the same 4-6 grade class sizes or are decreasing them • 78% of districts are keeping student fees the same or decreasing them • 92% of districts are keeping sports programs the same or expanding them
#7 With reforms, Wisconsin’s teacher to student ratio in the classroom remains low. According to information from the National Center for Education Statistics, the teacher to pupil ratio in Wisconsin public schools continues to be lower than the projected national average (x). Teacher to pupil ratio: 13.3 to 11 – 2011-12 Wisconsin 15.6 to 1 – 2010-11 National 1 872,286 pupils/65,400.5 teachers – Using the most recent WI DPI enrollment data and teacher staffing level survey data.
#8 The Governor’s reforms end abusive overtime practices. According to the Legislative Audit Bureau, state agency overtime totaled $57.1 million in 2010. Governor Walker’s reforms end overtime abuse originally facilitated in a collective bargaining agreement in 1975 (xi). For example, the Department of Corrections allowed correctional workers who call in sick to collect overtime if they work a shift on the exact same day. Cost to taxpayers – $4.8 million in 2010 alone. This benefit was previously protected by union contract.
#9 The Governor’s reforms allow school districts and municipalities to manage staffing based on merit and performance. Previously, under union contracts, school districts and municipalities were required to arbitrarily layoff the newest employees first. Also, pay increases were dictated by years of service and level of schooling, not on an employee’s performance. In cases where school leaders deem termination necessary, they can now expedite the process without lengthy, expensive arbitration and legal fees. For example, the Middleton-Cross Plains District has spent more than $400,000 trying to terminate a teacher after an investigation revealed 23 documented instances involving school emails that contained inappropriate material. The $400,000 bill for arbitration and legal costs is paid for out of the schools operating budget. State and local government employees continue to be protected by numerous state and federal employment laws.
#10 The Governor’s reforms allow school district officials to make budget decisions and set work rules based on what’s best for education. Staff salaries and compensation make up the bulk of school budgets (approximately 75%). When that was untouchable due to union contracts, districts facing shortfalls were forced to cut from the remaining fraction of the budget (programs, supplies) or lay off staff. School leaders may now consider changes in benefit packages and other options to keep teachers on the job and save taxpayer money. For example, after reforms in the Fond du Lac District, school leaders decided teachers would eight hours per day instead of seven. In Brown Deer, teachers now teach six of eight classes instead of five. In Kaukauna, teachers are now required to work eight hours per day instead of 7.5. Kaukauna School officials estimate staffing flexibilities will save the district $575,000 this year.
#11 Under the Governor’s reforms, the single option to change health insurance providers has already saved school districts tens of millions of dollars so far. Many school union contracts dictated which company provides its employee’s health insurance coverage. This prevented districts from shopping around to save costs. Introducing competition into the process means lower costs, sometimes even without changes to coverage, premiums and/or copays. For example, following Governor Walker’s reforms, the Appleton School District put its policy up for bid. Due to competition, their current provider offered the same policy at a cost savings of more than $3 million. Savings from health care providers and plan changes top $75 million so far this year. .
#12 Government workers now have the option of saving more than $72 million per year in union dues (xii). Government workers continue to have the option to be represented by a union, but it is no longer mandated by the state that they contribute union dues.
#13 In balancing the budget, Governor Walker paid off more than $800 million of debt left from the previous administration (xiii). The debt Walker’s Administration inherited, and paid off includes: • $235 million to the state’s Injured Patients and Families Compensation Fund as a result of an unconstitutional raid by a previous Legislature • $176.5 million Medicaid shortfall • $58.7 million to Minnesota for income tax collected from Wisconsin residents who work in Minnesota (Accruing interest – $4,584/day) • $20 million to the state Department of Corrections • $341.8 million in lapses leftover by the previous administration Total $831.7 million
#14 Smart government spending leads to job creation. In the three years prior to Governor Walker taking office, Wisconsin lost 150,000 jobs. In 2011, the state has GAINED 16,000 jobs so far. Business owners say a fiscally responsible government and business-friendly state leaders give them the confidence they need to expand, grow, and hire. Wisconsin jumped 17 spots from 2010 to 2011 in Chief Executive Magazine for best states to do business in (xiv).
Instead of a person who would reform government and spending, let's continue down this path of destruction until we can't. Then you can blame it all on Bush.
He can only deal with today. His state is in the Black without tax increases which Democrats like obama are famous for. I applaud his work to eliminate the unionized school teachers healthcare plan sponsored by the union which cost millions more than the state employee plan. The teachers can still be union members, just send in you dues. Why should the tax payers be responsible for the cost of collecting dues for a union.
But Rick, you only understand spend and spend more. What it's spent on means nothing as long as government is bigger and continues to enslave the people. As long as the union right or wrong remains intact. As long as the mantra lives.
Yes we can, hit 20 trillion in debt before obama is finally a footnote in history. No we can't pay it off as people like yourself can for more, more.
p.s. the clown show has been running nonstop for 5 years with the clown in the white house trying to figure out which ring to perform in
I wouldn’t necessarily confuse not voting for ignorance. It is true that the major parties, in my opinion the Democratic Party in particular, derive much of their relevance from ignorance and dependence of much of the electorate. If I had a dollar of every time I had been told that I wasted my vote or time, I could be doing quite well indeed. No, I would say many of these people are disenfranchised by a system that preordains winners and works tirelessly to purge anyone not on message. Voters only get to pick one of those already anointed. Grassroots does not work in the US because the major parties insure that it doesn’t. I know what kind of leader I want... one with a reasonable amount of honesty and integrity would be a good start, and I haven’t found one put forth by either party in a while. Reagan to me appeared relatively honest but his policies did not appeal. He is the closest that I have come to voting for a winner for president... ever. So, with a track record like that, one wouldn’t excuse a little apathy.
We hear a lot about the Koch Brothers and the manipulations that they inject into elections. They are bit players compared to the likes of Soros who has his influence in North America, Europe and no doubt Australia. It is no secret that most powerful democrats are 1) central planners and 2) globalist. Republicans on the other hand are guardians of morality... and sense democrats want a one world government, they might as well be the leaders. Now while I would love a world without borders and if it were lead by anyone, I would prefer it to be of a US democratic ilk... the attitude of the republic today is not anything like the republic that I think people should be governed by.
I would suggest that there has been no boat rocking for far more years than 3. It has been a long time since the Chicago riots at the Democratic National Convention in 1968. Last cycle was the first time in a long time that either of the national party’s faced disruption in the ranks. As I said, both parties work tirelessly to end grassroots and third party efforts so the only way to effect change is within the established party.
While people want to talk about the large number of fielded candidates, the only real disruption was from Ron Paul supporters. They were organized and active and turned many state primaries upside down because they, in many cases, took control of them... all legal, all with the rules but they were, arrested, had legitimate votes nullified and faced rules changes just to exclude their voice. The real noise was wasn’t the number of contenders, it was one contender.
What is happening right now is a process of nullification of both Rand Paul and Ted Cruz and not just by the Republican party. As you can see from Ricks comment, it is a parrot of democratic comment nationwide. Neither are statists, globalists or war hawks and while they have strong moral convictions, they do not believe the government to be the ultimate place for those issues to be settled, not at the national level anyway. Both believe in the constitution and rule of law, something we see increasingly violated by government today. Both understand that if the constitution prevents the government from creating laws that force people act one way, by reasoned logic, it shouldn’t allow for government to force people to act the opposite.
Once people realize that they are empowered... that they don’t need government to support them, the democratic party loses its relevance and once people are freed to determine the social structure of their communities, the republican party loses its.... It is the power structure doesn’t want change... and the minions fall in line. I have yet to hear just what radical policies are proposed by libertarians and Tea party purists... except that they like the constitution and rule of law and don't hold people as helpless, ignorant or irresponsible and aren't inclined to rule the world, thus requiring considerably less government to feed.... radical.
I think what King means is a repeat of the last Republican primary, affectionately known as the clown show. Look the extremes of the party (read teas) bounced from one candidate to another with their support until they effectively back each one in succession except John Huntsman who was probably the least well known but best candidate of the bunch. There was no support for the eventual nominee Mitt Romney until all the other dominoes had fallen. Best thing for the Repubs this time is to shorten the primary season and especially don't have the debate a weekend format. Of those who have "shown interest" looks like Christie, Huntsman, Jeb Bush, and Rick Santorum are the ones who can garner widespread appeal in a general election.
Watching the media talking heads on the leftist networks they are standing up Jeb to face her highness. Christie is fighting for his life against the NY media, every lawyer in NJ and BO's justice department who are all playing "who hid the road cones." Christie is looking svelt so it's doubtful he swallowed the cones.
All the names mentioned above are yesterday's fish special. If Romney doesn't make a return run Rand Paul will position himself as a strong contender. He may unwittingly end up saving the republican party. An awful load of young people are carrying school debt at the same time being unable to be fully employed.
My Tea Part extremist pick remains Paul/Carson. I suppose I qualify as an extremist because I've been married 42 years, owned a business for 41 years, grew three children who are growing five grandchildren,,,
Not to mention paid property taxes for 37 years, and they ain't cheap in NJ, supported the federal government with various income, excise, fuel, payroll, and assorted fees,,,
Attended my first demonstration as a participant at the age of 58, although I did view the monkees in DC during Vietnam anti war marches. Attended peaceful marches in NJ, DC, Philadelphia, Trenton, etc,,,without leaving a candy wrapper behind,,,
Yeah that's me,,,an extremist,,,yeah that's who I attend monthly Tea Party meetings with,,,a bunch of extremists.
Yeah that's us,,,we believe in living within our means,,,lowering debt,,,following the law,,,the rule of law,,,,and promoting freedom,,,limiting government,,,as our constitutional founders set out for us,,,
Yeah that's us,,,, extremists in the words of people who live half way around the world, and our leftist/democrat/socialist/progressive/communist/ Marxist friends here on the board.
Yes they would label you as an agitator, extremist as you don't support "oh the poor people" who live quite comfortably on the backs of the taxpayers. Some are deserving, many not. None deserve a free cell phone.
But you cannot get votes without FREE. You cannot even begin to talk about balancing the budget, living withing our means. That would be austerity which this country has never known
Not to worry, austerity is just around the corner and will happen when the investors say no thanks to the treasuries, and the debt of the US. Everyone thinks we are insulated from that as we can print our own money. Yes we can but who will take it?
Our "extremist" Tea Party ideas are not based on PR or Madison Avenue. We don't really care what you call us or think of us. Most of us are way past that stage of thinking.
We care about reason and logic, we care deeply about our children and grandchildren,,,
And yes we care deeply about your children and grandchildren,,,
We care deeply about the erosion of our constitutional ideals,,,
A little over five years ago we as a movement didn't even exist.
The learning process is ongoing louman. But it is a wave. Movements are much different than retail politics. Waves are hardly felt in the middle of the ocean (read main street media), but when they crash on the shore,,,,watch the hell out!
Ok un-informed tea party types, Free phone service for the poor was started in 1996 although it's just another ongoing service you want to pile on Obama because you don't know any better. Landline service has been provided for low income people since 1996. The cell phone idea came about in 2008 (oops still no Obama is there). It was started in that wonderful tax free conservative bastion of the State of Tennessee. And it gets better here's the real kicker, the service is provided by the individual states as part of the welfare program not by Barack Obama and not by the federal government. If fact YOU ,I everyone with a cell phone pays for it. Look for your Universal Service Fund on your next pay date. And why is this here on every telephone bill in America? It's called the telecommunications Act of 1996. This act made explicit that phone providers had to make universal service available to all citizens at regardless of income regardless of location. This wonderful piece of legislation was of course passed by your own. The senate and the house were both controlled by the republican party in 1996. I'll start having my poor friends with phones publically thank you all. More right wing myth that Obama invented the free phone.
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/legacy/otiahome/top/publicationmedia/newsltr/telcom_act.htm#UNIVERSAL SERVICE
The federal Lifeline assistance program was created in 1984. Through the program, eligible consumers can receive a discount on their monthly telephone bill, as well as the costs associated with establishing phone service, through the Link Up program. Residents of tribal lands may be eligible for additional discounts.
The lifeline program was changed to include cell phones in 2008, Democratic house and senate, attached to a funding bill signed by Bush. At the end of 2008 the lifeline program cost 800 million dollars. The program was expanded no holds barred under Obama to it's bloated over 3 billion dollar state today.
The difference, under previous presidents, proof was needed. Today, no proof, just say your eligible. The actual requirement is if your on any welfare program, you qualify.
A great program to aid shut ins, trashed adding more people to the government freebie roll. The program needs to be returned to the original intent if a land line to help shut in's.
Interesting article as the starter for a discussion but somewhat deficient in analysis. By the time the American political news gets to Aussie it is reduced to one of three topics. What has the President (either party) said today (2) has there been any real or perceived scandal uncovered and three has the opposition scored any political knock downs in the perennial debate.
ReplyDeleteClinton is well known here as the wife of a good president who suffered from the disease common to so many powerful men. A zipper on his pants which his mother should have had permanently welded shut. During that particular scandal, Monica Lewinski was better known here than the first lady. Her service as Sec State has brought Ms Clinton to the notice of the Australian public and I believe she is well regarded here. The recent change in Australian government may perhaps cloud her image as there is a strong Conservative feeling throughout the land. Two weeks ago Tasmania threw out a Socialist (Dem) government which had been in power for 14 long years. South Australia came within one seat of doing the same. In fact S.A. now relies on one independent to maintain the Labor party in government.
What is obvious to Australians is the inevitability of Mrs. Clinton securing the Democratic Party nomination. It is further recognized that as with the last Presidential bun fight, the Republicans will tear themselves apart in the battle to secure the nomination. I do have trouble however in accepting at this stage that Rand Paul is the likely opponent for Clinton. Christie and Ben Carson, the latter still undecided about running, are possibilities perhaps.
Now, I realize that I am being somewhat controversial today but if I rile other readers here I apologize .My hope is that you will rebut my argument with factual responses which will enhance my understanding of your Politics.
So then, the final and perhaps most important factor in getting a change in Government, believe me I do think a change is needed! If for a moment we forget to label certain sections of the Republican movement there may be a chance. Unfortunately I can see only the extremists on the right, well intentioned as they undoubtedly are, pulling down the chances of whichever candidate is chosen.
You will notice that my avatar is a creature native to Australia. I adopted this after a discussion on the old Market Watch with a bloke I upset just a little. He suggested I” go stuff a Wombat”. So please choose another animal if you want to” get stuck in” I am quite fond of my little Hairy nosed wombat!
Cheers from Aussie
K,
DeleteHillary Clinton isn’t expected to announce her intentions about a presidential bid until after the midterm elections, but it’s already a real possibility she won’t face any real opposition if she decides to run.
California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) told reporters yesterday he wasn’t going to run. He joins Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) who said late last year she wouldn’t be a candidate either.
Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley (D) clearly wants to run, but has said he won’t if Clinton is a candidate. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) is also thought to have ambitions for higher office but almost no one thinks he would challenge Clinton.
Vice President Joe Biden clearly wants another chance and has been keeping up his political travel over the last year. But nearly every early poll shows him losing to Clinton by a wide margin.
Former Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer (D) clearly enjoys talking about running for president, but he did the same about running for U.S. Senate last year and ultimately decided against it.
Of course, there are always candidates who run simply for the attention and publicity. Dennis Kucinich or Al Sharpton or Mike Gravel may announce their candidacies in a hope to get on stage in a nationally-televised debate. But if Clinton is the only serious candidate running, will there even be any televised debates?
"Unfortunately I can see only the extremists on the right, well intentioned as they undoubtedly are, pulling down the chances of whichever candidate is chosen."
ReplyDeleteThanks for that.
While working in Australia I got quite close to a family that lived in Penrith, a suburb of Sidney. One weekend they took me to one of those native species petting zoos in the Blue Mountains. While there, Ben their son, leaned back against a wombat pen. Before anyone know, the wombat had chewed a hole in the back of his jacket... good thing it was realized then... it could have been the seat of his pants.
Could you explain what you mean by extremists? Are you saying that main stream republicans well go to the mate to preserve their power base and Tea Party types will do the same for their chosen candidate or are you indicating that some groups have extreme but well intentioned views that should be eyed with critical suspicion? If it is the later, which ones.
Scott. My thanks and please refer to the post of rick below. Rick has pretty much summed up the situation as I see it at the end of the long public bloodbath which was the fight for the last Republican nomination. So many candidates started and each had his own power base within the party. There was much prominence given to the tea party splinter group and the public I think became a bit sick of the circus which developed during such a protracted campaign, not for the office of POTUS, but for the nomination to contest the Presidential election.
DeleteSo to your question, or are you indicating that some groups have extreme but well intentioned views that should be eyed with critical suspicion? If it is the later, which ones. Obviously the Tea Party group is the most extreme and the noisiest. I have feeling that main stream America prefers a more moderate approach. I get the opportunity to speak to many Americans here, I never let an opportunity pass without speaking to the owner of an American accent and in general they are prepared to give me their opinion on most subjects. All agree with me that the Tea Party is genuine and sincere in their beliefs
For two or three years I have noted a reluctance to rock the boat, both Dems and Repubs seem to be looking for a moderate, perhaps just a little hawkish but this could be the hormones kicking in when I talk about the national psyche.
I have also noted great ignorance about Politics in your country, so many tell me, with pride, they do not vote.
Cheers from Aussie
K,
DeleteWhat's laughable is how much credence the media and the left has put into Hillary.
2 years as a senator.
4 years as Secretary of State.
First lady for 8 years.
Wife of a governor
Light weight attorney.
The Dem's have numerous candidates to chose from but prefer an obama clone in experience. The best part, they will have nothing to say when the debt kills the country as they have been a large part of it.
Oh, sorry, I forgot, it's Bush's fault.
Very reminiscent of our current president light of credentials but this seems to be what America is all about. Want free, vote for me.
Now you know why the majority of American do not vote which swings the election to the leftists in government. Many cannot just hold their nose and vote for one of the smelly parties.
Time for change we can believe in and it's neither of the popular monied parties.
I will agree that it's time for a change, but I don't see any Republican candidates who have more governmental experience than Clinton. Your efforts to demonize the Democrats, and liberals in general strikes me as rather amusing. As Rand Paul once said: "Democrats, Republicans, not a dime's worth of difference".
DeleteIt was Ron, not Rand: "We don’t have a good democratic process," Paul said. "What happens if you come to the conclusion, as millions of Americans have, these parties aren’t different, they’re all the same. The monetary policy stays the same. The welfare system stays the same. The foreign policy stays the same. They get pretty disgusted. There is but one party."
DeleteKind of reminds me of a Indonesia's Suharto slogan Mick... "Democracy without opposition"...
DeleteNo wonder we have the president we have today, all that deep thought.
DeleteThere is little difference between the parties however a vast difference between clinton and other politicians Democrat and Republican.
Do you really want they dynasty to continue? Do you really want more of the same?
I would vote for Jeb Bush, not because he is dynastic (George H. W., George W., Jeb, George P., etc) but because I thought he was a fine Governor of Florida. Is 2 a dynasty, how many does it take?
DeleteWhy not Mitch Daniels?
DeleteWhy not Scott Walker?
Both governors that have rescued states.
What's laughable lou is that you are so out of touch that you don't know that Clinton served a full 6 years in the senate and 2 years of a second term. You and William will talk endlessly of the dems lack of experience but would put your vote tomorrow on a guy with a whole lot less. Scott walker has not rescued Wisconsin. He had a widely publicized cut to state salaries and collective bargaining but his state is still billions in debt. All he did was cost Wisconsin millions in Federal funds that the residents of the state now must make up.
DeleteYes medicaid for all.
DeleteThe states that selected the Federal Government money get free for 3 years then they are on the hook for 10% of medicaid cost. Most state budgets are strained now they can just pony up the additional 10% until the Federal Government makes it more. Who's smarter? The governors that chose the free money today ignoring the cost of more in 3 years of the governor who said his state couldn't afford more?
That reality is 2.5 years away. Like many democrats you are a grasshopper while the ants work away.
As to Walker:
Governor Scott Walker’s budget turned a $3.6 billion state deficit into a surplus.
Wisconsin was facing one of the largest deficits in state history. Governor Walker’s budget projects a surplus for the first time in over 15 years (i).
* Includes outstanding debts, agency budget requests, and other shortfalls. See #13.
#2
For the first time in six years, school tax levies are down.
According to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau, the total K-12 tax levy decreased by more than $47 million for the 2011-2012 school year, following reforms.
For five years prior to Governor Walker’s reforms, the statewide average school levy tax increased $220 million per year (ii) for a total of $1.1 BILLION dollars.
#3
Without reforms, homeowners would have paid hundreds of dollars more in property taxes this year.
With Governor Walker’s reforms, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau, the typical homeowner will save $419 over the next two years (iii). When you include additional reforms, the savings rise to $710.
#4
Governor Walker’s budget protects health care coverage for seniors and the neediest families in the state.
Due to the loss of one-time federal stimulus funds and unsustainable program expansions Governor Walker faced a projected $1.8 billion deficit in the state’s Medicaid budget (iv).
Governor Walker’s budget protected seniors and the neediest families by investing $1.2 billion in new state funds for Medicaid. This was by far the largest one-time investment of state funds into Medicaid.
Facing a huge state deficit, Governor Walker’s budget protects SeniorCare, FamilyCare, and the disabled by not dropping seniors or disabled individuals from coverage.
Delete#5
The Governor’s reforms helped balance the budget while still offering employees a generous pension plan.
Prior to the Governor’s reforms, state employees paid little or nothing to be part of the Wisconsin Retirement System (pension) plan (xi). Payments to public employee pensions neared $1.5 billion in 2010(v). Of that amount, public employees contributed $12 million.
The Governor’s reforms require most state employees to pay approximately half of their pension contribution – or 5.8%. (Some employees, including the Governor, pay more.)
According to a report by the Wisconsin Policy Institute: (vi)
• Only 51% of private sector employees participate in a retirement plan.
• On average, private sector employers contribute 5.3% of payroll (matched by employee) for retirement plans. Before reforms, contributions to the state WRS plan were about 12%.
By comparison, retirement benefits for state employees are much more generous than those offered in the private sector.
• According to the Wisconsin Policy Institute report, a 25-year state employee earning $48,000/year will have the same estimated retirement income as a private sector employee earning $70,000/year.
• General state employees with 30 years of service can retire as early as age 57 with full pension benefits. Only 6% of private sector employers offer early retirement benefits.
A recent Taxpayer Alliance study projected that even with higher pension contributions, Wisconsin teacher benefits will be 20% higher than the national average (vii).
#6
The Governor’s reforms improve education in the state, particularly in the districts utilizing the tools that are now available to them.
According to a survey by the Wisconsin Association of School District Administrators released by DPI:
• New teacher hires outnumber layoffs and non-renewals by 1,799 positions (viii).
• The three districts with the most teacher layoffs (Milwaukee, Kenosha, and Janesville) didn’t adopt the reforms put in place by Governor Walker. Those districts account for 68% of teacher layoffs for the entire state, but only contain 12.8% of Wisconsin students (ix).
• 75% of districts have the same K-3 class sizes or are decreasing them
• 67% of districts have the same 4-6 grade class sizes or are decreasing them
• 78% of districts are keeping student fees the same or decreasing them
• 92% of districts are keeping sports programs the same or expanding them
#7
With reforms, Wisconsin’s teacher to student ratio in the classroom remains low.
According to information from the National Center for Education Statistics, the teacher to pupil ratio in Wisconsin public schools continues to be lower than the projected national average (x).
Teacher to pupil ratio:
13.3 to 11 – 2011-12 Wisconsin
15.6 to 1 – 2010-11 National
1 872,286 pupils/65,400.5 teachers – Using the most recent WI DPI enrollment data and teacher staffing level survey data.
#8
The Governor’s reforms end abusive overtime practices.
According to the Legislative Audit Bureau, state agency overtime totaled $57.1 million in 2010. Governor Walker’s reforms end overtime abuse originally facilitated in a collective bargaining agreement in 1975 (xi).
For example, the Department of Corrections allowed correctional workers who call in sick to collect overtime if they work a shift on the exact same day.
Cost to taxpayers – $4.8 million in 2010 alone.
This benefit was previously protected by union contract.
#9
DeleteThe Governor’s reforms allow school districts and municipalities to manage staffing based on merit and performance.
Previously, under union contracts, school districts and municipalities were required to arbitrarily layoff the newest employees first. Also, pay increases were dictated by years of service and level of schooling, not on an employee’s performance.
In cases where school leaders deem termination necessary, they can now expedite the process without lengthy, expensive arbitration and legal fees.
For example, the Middleton-Cross Plains District has spent more than $400,000 trying to terminate a teacher after an investigation revealed 23 documented instances involving school emails that contained inappropriate material. The $400,000 bill for arbitration and legal costs is paid for out of the schools operating budget.
State and local government employees continue to be protected by numerous state and federal employment laws.
#10
The Governor’s reforms allow school district officials to make budget decisions and set work rules based on what’s best for education.
Staff salaries and compensation make up the bulk of school budgets (approximately 75%). When that was untouchable due to union contracts, districts facing shortfalls were forced to cut from the remaining fraction of the budget (programs, supplies) or lay off staff.
School leaders may now consider changes in benefit packages and other options to keep teachers on the job and save taxpayer money.
For example, after reforms in the Fond du Lac District, school leaders decided teachers would eight hours per day instead of seven.
In Brown Deer, teachers now teach six of eight classes instead of five.
In Kaukauna, teachers are now required to work eight hours per day instead of 7.5.
Kaukauna School officials estimate staffing flexibilities will save the district $575,000 this year.
#11
Under the Governor’s reforms, the single option to change health insurance providers has already saved school districts tens of millions of dollars so far.
Many school union contracts dictated which company provides its employee’s health insurance coverage. This prevented districts from shopping around to save costs. Introducing competition into the process means lower costs, sometimes even without changes to coverage, premiums and/or copays.
For example, following Governor Walker’s reforms, the Appleton School District put its policy up for bid. Due to competition, their current provider offered the same policy at a cost savings of more than $3 million.
Savings from health care providers and plan changes top $75 million so far this year.
.
Delete#12
Government workers now have the option of saving more than $72 million per year in union dues (xii).
Government workers continue to have the option to be represented by a union, but it is no longer mandated by the state that they contribute union dues.
#13
In balancing the budget, Governor Walker paid off more than $800 million of debt left from the previous administration (xiii).
The debt Walker’s Administration inherited, and paid off includes:
• $235 million to the state’s Injured Patients and Families Compensation Fund as a result of an unconstitutional raid by a previous Legislature
• $176.5 million Medicaid shortfall
• $58.7 million to Minnesota for income tax collected from Wisconsin residents who work in Minnesota (Accruing interest – $4,584/day)
• $20 million to the state Department of Corrections
• $341.8 million in lapses leftover by the previous administration
Total $831.7 million
#14
Smart government spending leads to job creation.
In the three years prior to Governor Walker taking office, Wisconsin lost 150,000 jobs. In 2011, the state has GAINED 16,000 jobs so far.
Business owners say a fiscally responsible government and business-friendly state leaders give them the confidence they need to expand, grow, and hire. Wisconsin jumped 17 spots from 2010 to 2011 in Chief Executive Magazine for best states to do business in (xiv).
Instead of a person who would reform government and spending, let's continue down this path of destruction until we can't. Then you can blame it all on Bush.
He can only deal with today. His state is in the Black without tax increases which Democrats like obama are famous for. I applaud his work to eliminate the unionized school teachers healthcare plan sponsored by the union which cost millions more than the state employee plan. The teachers can still be union members, just send in you dues. Why should the tax payers be responsible for the cost of collecting dues for a union.
But Rick, you only understand spend and spend more. What it's spent on means nothing as long as government is bigger and continues to enslave the people. As long as the union right or wrong remains intact. As long as the mantra lives.
Yes we can, hit 20 trillion in debt before obama is finally a footnote in history. No we can't pay it off as people like yourself can for more, more.
p.s. the clown show has been running nonstop for 5 years with the clown in the white house trying to figure out which ring to perform in
I wouldn’t necessarily confuse not voting for ignorance. It is true that the major parties, in my opinion the Democratic Party in particular, derive much of their relevance from ignorance and dependence of much of the electorate. If I had a dollar of every time I had been told that I wasted my vote or time, I could be doing quite well indeed. No, I would say many of these people are disenfranchised by a system that preordains winners and works tirelessly to purge anyone not on message. Voters only get to pick one of those already anointed. Grassroots does not work in the US because the major parties insure that it doesn’t. I know what kind of leader I want... one with a reasonable amount of honesty and integrity would be a good start, and I haven’t found one put forth by either party in a while. Reagan to me appeared relatively honest but his policies did not appeal. He is the closest that I have come to voting for a winner for president... ever. So, with a track record like that, one wouldn’t excuse a little apathy.
DeleteWe hear a lot about the Koch Brothers and the manipulations that they inject into elections. They are bit players compared to the likes of Soros who has his influence in North America, Europe and no doubt Australia. It is no secret that most powerful democrats are 1) central planners and 2) globalist. Republicans on the other hand are guardians of morality... and sense democrats want a one world government, they might as well be the leaders. Now while I would love a world without borders and if it were lead by anyone, I would prefer it to be of a US democratic ilk... the attitude of the republic today is not anything like the republic that I think people should be governed by.
I would suggest that there has been no boat rocking for far more years than 3. It has been a long time since the Chicago riots at the Democratic National Convention in 1968. Last cycle was the first time in a long time that either of the national party’s faced disruption in the ranks. As I said, both parties work tirelessly to end grassroots and third party efforts so the only way to effect change is within the established party.
While people want to talk about the large number of fielded candidates, the only real disruption was from Ron Paul supporters. They were organized and active and turned many state primaries upside down because they, in many cases, took control of them... all legal, all with the rules but they were, arrested, had legitimate votes nullified and faced rules changes just to exclude their voice. The real noise was wasn’t the number of contenders, it was one contender.
What is happening right now is a process of nullification of both Rand Paul and Ted Cruz and not just by the Republican party. As you can see from Ricks comment, it is a parrot of democratic comment nationwide. Neither are statists, globalists or war hawks and while they have strong moral convictions, they do not believe the government to be the ultimate place for those issues to be settled, not at the national level anyway. Both believe in the constitution and rule of law, something we see increasingly violated by government today. Both understand that if the constitution prevents the government from creating laws that force people act one way, by reasoned logic, it shouldn’t allow for government to force people to act the opposite.
Once people realize that they are empowered... that they don’t need government to support them, the democratic party loses its relevance and once people are freed to determine the social structure of their communities, the republican party loses its.... It is the power structure doesn’t want change... and the minions fall in line. I have yet to hear just what radical policies are proposed by libertarians and Tea party purists... except that they like the constitution and rule of law and don't hold people as helpless, ignorant or irresponsible and aren't inclined to rule the world, thus requiring considerably less government to feed.... radical.
Well said TS.
DeleteI think what King means is a repeat of the last Republican primary, affectionately known as the clown show. Look the extremes of the party (read teas) bounced from one candidate to another with their support until they effectively back each one in succession except John Huntsman who was probably the least well known but best candidate of the bunch. There was no support for the eventual nominee Mitt Romney until all the other dominoes had fallen. Best thing for the Repubs this time is to shorten the primary season and especially don't have the debate a weekend format. Of those who have "shown interest" looks like Christie, Huntsman, Jeb Bush, and Rick Santorum are the ones who can garner widespread appeal in a general election.
ReplyDeleteIf Jeb Bush would change his name to Jeb Doe he would be a shoo-in.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWatching the media talking heads on the leftist networks they are standing up Jeb to face her highness. Christie is fighting for his life against the NY media, every lawyer in NJ and BO's justice department who are all playing "who hid the road cones." Christie is looking svelt so it's doubtful he swallowed the cones.
ReplyDeleteAll the names mentioned above are yesterday's fish special. If Romney doesn't make a return run Rand Paul will position himself as a strong contender. He may unwittingly end up saving the republican party. An awful load of young people are carrying school debt at the same time being unable to be fully employed.
My Tea Part extremist pick remains Paul/Carson. I suppose I qualify as an extremist because I've been married 42 years, owned a business for 41 years, grew three children who are growing five grandchildren,,,
DeleteNot to mention paid property taxes for 37 years, and they ain't cheap in NJ, supported the federal government with various income, excise, fuel, payroll, and assorted fees,,,
Attended my first demonstration as a participant at the age of 58, although I did view the monkees in DC during Vietnam anti war marches. Attended peaceful marches in NJ, DC, Philadelphia, Trenton, etc,,,without leaving a candy wrapper behind,,,
Yeah that's me,,,an extremist,,,yeah that's who I attend monthly Tea Party meetings with,,,a bunch of extremists.
Yeah that's us,,,we believe in living within our means,,,lowering debt,,,following the law,,,the rule of law,,,,and promoting freedom,,,limiting government,,,as our constitutional founders set out for us,,,
Yeah that's us,,,, extremists in the words of people who live half way around the world, and our leftist/democrat/socialist/progressive/communist/ Marxist friends here on the board.
Yes they would label you as an agitator, extremist as you don't support "oh the poor people" who live quite comfortably on the backs of the taxpayers. Some are deserving, many not. None deserve a free cell phone.
DeleteBut you cannot get votes without FREE. You cannot even begin to talk about balancing the budget, living withing our means. That would be austerity which this country has never known
Not to worry, austerity is just around the corner and will happen when the investors say no thanks to the treasuries, and the debt of the US. Everyone thinks we are insulated from that as we can print our own money. Yes we can but who will take it?
Our "extremist" Tea Party ideas are not based on PR or Madison Avenue. We don't really care what you call us or think of us. Most of us are way past that stage of thinking.
DeleteWe care about reason and logic, we care deeply about our children and grandchildren,,,
And yes we care deeply about your children and grandchildren,,,
We care deeply about the erosion of our constitutional ideals,,,
A little over five years ago we as a movement didn't even exist.
1773-2009 Tea Party extremists,,,Join Us!
As a conservative independent, I embrace many of the TP ideals as well as Libertarian ideals.
DeleteLike yourself, I care less what others think of my ideals as well as my viewpoint.
The attitude of another democrat that's a clone of the current is abhorrent to me as well as another GWB.
Time for a president that represent all of the people of the US not just a party hack.
The learning process is ongoing louman. But it is a wave. Movements are much different than retail politics. Waves are hardly felt in the middle of the ocean (read main street media), but when they crash on the shore,,,,watch the hell out!
DeleteOk un-informed tea party types, Free phone service for the poor was started in 1996 although it's just another ongoing service you want to pile on Obama because you don't know any better. Landline service has been provided for low income people since 1996. The cell phone idea came about in 2008 (oops still no Obama is there). It was started in that wonderful tax free conservative bastion of the State of Tennessee. And it gets better here's the real kicker, the service is provided by the individual states as part of the welfare program not by Barack Obama and not by the federal government. If fact YOU ,I everyone with a cell phone pays for it. Look for your Universal Service Fund on your next pay date. And why is this here on every telephone bill in America? It's called the telecommunications Act of 1996. This act made explicit that phone providers had to make universal service available to all citizens at regardless of income regardless of location. This wonderful piece of legislation was of course passed by your own. The senate and the house were both controlled by the republican party in 1996. I'll start having my poor friends with phones publically thank you all. More right wing myth that Obama invented the free phone.
Deletehttp://www.ntia.doc.gov/legacy/otiahome/top/publicationmedia/newsltr/telcom_act.htm#UNIVERSAL SERVICE
http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/universal-service
DeleteOK uninformed Rick
DeleteLifeline Program Overview
The federal Lifeline assistance program was created in 1984. Through the program, eligible consumers can receive a discount on their monthly telephone bill, as well as the costs associated with establishing phone service, through the Link Up program. Residents of tribal lands may be eligible for additional discounts.
The lifeline program was changed to include cell phones in 2008, Democratic house and senate, attached to a funding bill signed by Bush. At the end of 2008 the lifeline program cost 800 million dollars.
The program was expanded no holds barred under Obama to it's bloated over 3 billion dollar state today.
The difference, under previous presidents, proof was needed. Today, no proof, just say your eligible. The actual requirement is if your on any welfare program, you qualify.
A great program to aid shut ins, trashed adding more people to the government freebie roll. The program needs to be returned to the original intent if a land line to help shut in's.