The Importance of Voter Enthusiasm

This is good news for the GOP...the most recent CNN enthusiasm poll



If you notice, the enthusiasm is definitely on the side of the Republicans. 54% of Republicans in this poll are AT LEAST very enthusiastic for the November mid-term elections. However, according to CNN, only 32% of Democrats in this poll are pumped to vote this November. This equates to a 22% “enthusiasm gap" (or EG) in favor of the Republicans.

This is important (and good) for several reasons.

First, those more enthusiastic to vote will obviously be those that will go to the polls.

Second, this EG demonstrates that many Republicans who may have supported President Obama in 2008 are probably having buyers remorse. There’s always the chance that an Obama-supporting Republican might be really excited to vote for Democrats in the midterms to keep the President’s agenda running strong, but I would not bet on it.

Third, the enthusiasm gap will be very advantageous in the summer and fall leading up to the election. More excited voters are not only more excited to vote, but they are more excited to organize, donate time and money, and spread the conservative gospel.

Augmented excitement from the party base is what parties strive for, and a significant lead in the EG is a good place to start in an election year.

To compare, let's look at the enthusiasm gap in 2008, perhaps the worst electoral year for Republicans in recent memory. About 5 months before that election, the enthusiasm gap as polled by CNN was a bit different.



In this poll, a whopping 63% of Democrats were excited to vote, while only 37% of Republicans were excited to vote (in a Presidential election, mind you). That equates to a 26% EG, that turned into a 17% EG by election day, which turned into a 7% victory for President Obama over Senator McCain.

What will this current 22% EG lead to in November? Who knows? But one thing is clear: The Republicans have the wind at their backs, and they should press their advantage in the coming months.

News from the border

Good news for those who want a secure border

President Barack Obama will deploy up to 1,200 more National Guard troops to the U.S. border with Mexico, an administration official told CNN on Tuesday.

I personally think this is a very smart move for the President. This past week saw his Attorney General, Eric Holder, look rather foolish on national television by: 1) threatening a lawsuit against the Arizona law, and 2) admitting he hasn't actually read the bill (less than 20 pages long). This prompted Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona to create the following video, which is, admittedly, very strange...but telling.



The President certainly does not want to be seen as weak. Both Republicans and Democrats can easily agree that security on the border is not only lacking, but the border itself is rather dangerous, considering the increase in violence over the past year.

By sending more than 1000 troops to help with border security, the President has not only made a smart political decision, he's made a smart security decision.

Race for Attorney General

The presumptive Republican candidate for Attorney General of Iowa, Brenna Findley, has had a very impressive fundraising haul in 2010, thus far. She has raised almost $125,000 in the first five months of 2010, a sum that exceeds the amount raised by the Democratic incumbent, Tom Miller. Miller raised less than $16,000, but still has over $100,000 cash on hand.

Here's the deal. Tom Miller has been Attorney General longer than I’ve been alive. With that in mind, perhaps Mr. Miller should consider retirement. As should Robert Byrd.

But I digress.

I’ve met Brenna Findley and heard her speak. She is a no-nonsense conservative who has the ability to connect with the conservative base, while also discussing common sense solutions that all Iowans should want. Many on the left will most likely frame her as an extreme small government conservative. However, with the size, scope, debt, and control of the federal government growing to epic proportions, I think that the next couple of years will see more and more American citizens turning towards smaller government ideas that protect individual freedoms and liberties.

As for Findley, she’ll be fighting for those ideals as the future Attorney General of Iowa.

By the way, if anything is "extreme" right now, it is certainly not a small government conservative. Rather, it’s the ridiculous budget of the federal government.

A Euro Trip

I love visiting Europe. The continent has a rich past that any history buff such as myself would enjoy. Having visited France, Britain, Italy, Spain, and Monaco, I have seen quite a bit of the western portion of the continent, and I am quite fond of it.

However, Europe has been struggling financially, especially over the last few weeks. Last summer, when I went to Europe, 1 American dollar could purchase roughly .68 Euros. Today, 1 American dollar buys nearly .82 Euros.

In this chart, notice how much the dollar has improved against the Euro over the last five months.



Because of financial strife in Greece and overarching issues relating to the common currency of the EU, the Euro, it has certainly been a controversial and fiscally painful economic downturn in 2010.

"Europe's bailout plan for Greece may have calmed market fears about the future of the euro, but there is still uncertainty about the long-term outlook for the struggling currency.

While the euro zone isn't likely to ditch the 11-year old common currency anytime soon, many believe that the bailout hasn't solved the underlying problem of imbalances between European nations. And critics of the common currency used by 329 million people across 16 nations argue that the euro is a major cause of those imbalances."

I think there are several things that we can derive from this European crisis, but I want to focus on two today.

First, I believe that there are several powerful figures who would love to create a North American Union consisting of Mexico, Canada, and the United States. I would hope that this major currency problem in Europe would make those folks feel otherwise. While I commend Europe for working around numerous economic hurdles in creating the Euro, these present struggles seemingly indicate that all of the kinks haven’t truly been worked out.

Recently, French President Sarkozy indicated that France is at least considering drastic measures such as dropping the Euro (although I think this is highly unlikely). I certainly am not going to say that the Euro has been a disaster, but its struggles should illuminate the fact that a North American Union would be the wrong way to go.

Second, I believe that high levels of spending in Europe are partially responsible for this crisis. While many people of Europe seem to enjoy the high levels of government spending, it has not only created issues for the currency, but it has hampered long term growth of nations’ economies.



Glancing at the graph above, it is evident that over the last 45 years, the countries whose governments have spent ridiculous amounts of money have grown very little on an average annual basis. While the chart is simplistic, and only uses “average” annual growth, the point is clear. When a government choose to tax and spend insane amounts of money, economic expansion is severely hindered.

Once this crisis is over, I would hope that European nations (particularly Greece) can make better decisions with their money. While we’re on the topic, I hope that this nation can make better decisions with its money too.

Lance Cpl. Joshua Davis

A hero from Dallas County

Lance Corporal Joshua Davis, 19, a 2009 Perry High School graduate, was killed while fighting in the Helmand province of southern Afghanistan.

U.S. military forces want to wrest control of the Helmand from Taliban insurgents there and disrupt the opium production, which funds terrorist activities.

A hero, Lance Cpl. Joshua Davis, will be missed. Men and women who give their lives by honorably serving in the United States military should be praised for their ultimate sacrifice.

At this time, Afghanistan remains a hotbed for terrorist activities, yet U.S. troops continue to valiantly fight for freedom in the Central Asian nation. Joshua Davis, a son of Perry, Iowa, was one of many brave Americans who are fighting the Taliban there.

Here are just a few things that people close to Davis said about him:

"The thing that was cool about him was that he had no quit in him."

"He was just one of those kids that wanted to get out there and get fighting."

"Josh always gave 100 percent...He gave his best effort."

"He was very humble."

Please keep Josh's family and friends in your thoughts and prayers. The death of Lance Cpl. Joshua Davis is tragic. He deserves to be remembered and honored for his dedication and brave service to the United States of America.

Tuesday Night Musings

**No one could have expected this:

President Barack Obama's new health care law could potentially add at least $115 billion more to government health care spending over the next 10 years, congressional budget referees said Tuesday.

I would act surprised, but I would have to assume that even Democrats probably realized that this would occur...the cost of this health care deal is going to skyrocket.

---
**Elena Kagan is President Obama's nominee to the Supreme Court

We don't know a lot about Elena Kagan. She'll most likely be a reliable liberal vote on the court, much like John Paul Stevens was. I'll have more on her later.

---
**The United Kingdom has a new Prime Minister

Gordon Brown, current Prime Minister, and his Labour Party have fallen out of favor with the British electorate. Because of this, Brown has stepped down and Queen Elizabeth II has invited the new Prime Minister, Conservative David Cameron, to form a government. Before everyone here gets excited about the new "conservative" leader in Britain, keep in mind that a Conservative in England is a bit to the left of a conservative in the United States.

---
**A recent poll on the new immigration law in Arizona. Of particular note are questions 33 and 34, shown below.



A large majority of Americans (including a majority of Democrats) want to see how this law works before the Obama administration puts a halt to enforcement of existing federal law.

While there are, no doubt, concerns about this new Arizona law, it appears that most Americans have a "wait and see" attitude.

If local police begin racial profiling (which is prohibited under this law) then we will have a serious problem. Perhaps I'm a bit optimistic, but I don't believe we're going to see a lot of this, simply because Arizona has placed itself under the microscope, and the implementation of this law is going to scrutinized very carefully. Time will tell.

Is this Democratic Leader frightened?

Harry Reid, the leader of the Democrats in the Senate, might be losing it.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid lashed out at Republicans as the “anti-immigrant party” in an interview aired Sunday on Univision.

“I'm frustrated; I'm upset just like the people you referred to,” he said, of the lack of meaningful movement on immigration. “We are begging Republicans to join with us. This is an issue that demands our attention and doesn't demand the negativity, so irrational what is going on.”

Clearly, a Democratic strategy for this election cycle will be flinging accusations of racism towards the Republican Party.

Along the lines of my lesson last week, here's a new lesson. If you are against illegal immigration, then you are not anti-immigrant. To understand this statement more clearly, I'll say it in a different way: If you are for legal immigration, you are not anti-immigrant.

As I've discussed before, most Republicans I talk to simply feel that legal immigration is the proper (and again, legal) way to gain entry into the United States of America.

Personally, I think Senator Reid is trying to demonize the GOP, in order to gain favor with some voters back at home. Why would he do this? I think the numbers and chart below speak volumes.




With anemic numbers like these, Senator Reid is probably doing everything possible to gain some traction in this race. Eventually, he will gain at least some traction for several reasons.

1. Harry Reid has a lot of money.
2. Incumbancy is powerful, even in an anti-incumbant year, and Harry Reid's a fighter.
3. Sue Lowden, his potential opponent is saying some interesting things that are getting her into trouble.
4. The likely Republican nominee at this point, Danny Tarkanian, doesn't seem to be an outstanding candidate, thusfar. I've included his polling data against Reid, because I'm not sure Lowden's going to make it out of the primary.

It doesn't mean he's the favorite by any means, but it will be a close race in Nevada; a nail-biter to the finish for one of the most powerful leaders in the Democratic Party. Hopefully, Senator Reid will stop insinuating racism in his interviews though...especially during interviews that are meant to do one thing: pander.

Congress Makes a Move

This is a good move:

“Most members of Congress next year will receive $174,000 in 2011 under legislation awaiting President Barack Obama's signature, the same amount they're getting this year.

Under the law that governs congressional pay, senators and representatives were due to get an automatic cost of living increase on January 1 , probably an extra $1,600 or 0.9 percent, unless they voted beforehand to turn it down.

Last week, they did just that. The Senate rejected the increase in a voice vote, and the House of Representatives concurred, 402 to 15.”

In the land of the Potomac, sometimes the voice of the people is drowned out by the language of Washington. Unfortunately, it can produce an echo chamber where Representatives and Senators have little clue as to what’s happening around the country.

Well, the situation around the country isn’t terribly good. Americans are struggling with the recession that still has unemployment hovering near 10%. Economic growth is not what it should be, government spending is out of control, inflation is up, and the citizenry is clamoring for some real leadership in Washington D.C. It’s why a large anti-incumbency wave is going sweep through Congress six months from now. And since the Democrats have been in the majority for more than three years, they may be the recipients of heavy losses in both the House and Senate.

People aren't idiots. They realize when change turns out to be a bad thing. In November, I wrote a post comparing 1995-1997, when the Republicans took over the Congress, to 2007-2009, when the Democrats took over the Congress.

Here’s what I wrote back then.

"January 1995 - Republicans take over Congress, the budget, and the country’s pocketbook.
Unemployment is 6.2%
November of 1997, nearly 3 years later, the Republicans are still in charge of Congress.
Unemployment is down to 4.3%

January 2007 - Democrats take over Congress, the budget, and the country’s pocketbook.
Unemployment is 5%
November 2009, nearly 3 years later, the Democrats are still in charge of Congress.
Unemployment has doubled to over 10%."

Now, to be fair, unemployment has lowered itself to just above 9% over the last six months. However, it doesn’t take an economics major, or a 4th grader to understand that there's a serious difference in the results produced by these two time periods. The Democrats are in trouble, Congress is unpopular, and it’s obvious why.

So, Congress decides to NOT give itself its pay raise this year, a popular move that should be commended. However, it would truly commendable if Congress gave itself a pay cut, like so many other Americans have received during this economic downturn.

An Iowa Election Poll

Here’s the latest polling from Rasmussen:

2010 Senate
53% Grassley (R), 40% Conlin (D)

2010 Governor
53% Branstad (R), 38% Culver (D)
45% Vander Plaats (R), 41% Culver (D)
43% Culver (D), 41% Roberts (R)

Favorable / Unfavorable
Chuck Grassley: 63 / 34 (+29)
Terry Branstad: 59 / 38 (+21)
Bob Vander Plaats: 44 / 35 (+9)

Rod Roberts: 31 / 27 (+4)
Roxanne Conlin: 44 / 40 (+4)
Chet Culver: 44 / 53 (-9)

Job Approval / Disapproval
Pres. Obama: 48 / 51 (-3)
Gov. Culver: 43 / 56 (-13)

After looking at these numbers, one thing is for sure: Governor Chet Culver is going to have a very tough November unless these numbers turn around. Anytime an incumbent is hovering around a 40% approval rating, he’s usually toast. 50% is usually the safe mark, where an incumbent can at least have a fighting chance at reelection.

It looks as though Vander Plaats would defeat Culver in a close election. A Roberts nomination would probably produce a nail biter on election night. A Brandstad nomination would be an easy victory for the former governor.

However, the primary for the GOP is still a month away. Will the Republican electorate demand a social conservative in BVP or will they be willing to accept a social moderate/conservative in Terry Branstad? Or will they want the soft-spoken Roberts to run against the Governor? Time will tell.

As for the Senate race, the race is getting closer. Although Chuck Grassley is the most popular politician in the state, besting the Hawkeye state’s junior Senator Harkin, and even President Obama, he is only up 13 points on prolific fundraiser and likely Democratic nominee Roxanne Conlin. Conlin should be pleased with this poll, putting her within striking distance of being within striking distance. However, she should not be pleased with the favorability ratings. At this point, most Iowans seemingly know who she is, and have an opinion towards her. This is no good for Ms. Conlin. At this point in the campaign, a much more enviable position is that of Rod Roberts. Only a small majority of Iowans have an opinion of the gubernatorial candidate.

If Conlin had those kinds of numbers, she would have more room to grow and make up those 13 points against Iowa’s senior senator. However, it’s going to be tough for her to do that.

Some good news for Conlin? At least she’s not Governor Culver.

Quick Sunday Facts

Let's remind everyone of two indisputable facts once again:

1. If you believe that illegal immigrants should not receive amnesty, you are not a racist. Period.

2. If you believe that another race, immigrant or not, illegal or not, is inferior to your race, you are a racist. Period.

I hope you enjoy this lovely Sunday.

A Controversial Immigration Bill Pt. 2

The law which passed last week in Arizona has certainly incited protests against the state. Latino organizations are fiercely protesting this law, and they certainly have the right too, and I understand why they are protesting. As I said in a previous post, many Latino organizations undoubtedly feel that Arizona police will stop Hispanic residents of the state for no reason whatsoever, and “demand to see their papers.”

Hearing these criticisms, Governor Jan Brewer and the state legislature made a few changes to the law.

Under the law, police would be able to detain an individual based merely on the suspicion that he or she entered the country illegally. But one of the changes -- which had been adopted by state lawmakers Thursday night -- says police could stop suspected illegal immigrants only while enforcing some other law or ordinance.

An officer could only ask about an immigrant's legal status, for example, while investigating that person for speeding, loitering or some other offense.

The facts are these:

Before the change: Police can stop anyone with “reasonable suspicion.” Critics believe that this statement could be liberally interpreted, stretched to the limit, and civil liberties could potentially be violated. President Obama had this to say, while visiting Ottumwa.

"You can imagine if you are an Hispanic American in Arizona, your great grandparents may have been there before Arizona was even a state, but now suddenly if you don't have your papers, and you took your kid out to get ice cream, you're gonna be harassed," Obama said. "That's something that could potentially happen. That's not the right way to go."

Notice that President Obama, former constitutional law professor, never said that the bill was unconstitutional. Nonetheless, the Arizona state government decided to alter their law.

After the change: Police CANNOT stop anyone with “reasonable suspicion” only. There must be an offense committed. Therefore, the President’s story about an ice cream desiring family now, by law, cannot happen…unless mom is speeding on the way to Coldstone. Furthermore:

University of Arizona law professor Gabriel Chin told CNN that the changes to the bill are significant, insofar as they help remove a "huge disincentive for victims and witnesses to cooperate with the police."

Under the original version of the law, he said, police officers would have been obligated to arrest a suspected illegal immigrant who approached them after being victimized. That would not be the case under the revised law.

I would hope that these changes would be welcomed, because most folks should realize that these alterations are more realistic, and less “Nazi-like,” right?

"It doesn't deter anything," said Dan Pochoda, legal director of the Arizona ACLU. "It's not a serious hurdle."

Pochoda said that law enforcement officers -- under strong pressure to find and remove illegal immigrants -- could still identify people by race and then look for a minor infraction as an excuse to investigate them.

Sorry, Governor Brewer…you just can’t win. It seems as though you heard a lot of criticism, listened to it, and then made the changes that you felt were necessary to improve the bill. Mr. Pochoda, if you believe that police will be intentionally looking for people to break the law, looking for any excuse to pull over a Latino family on the way to get ice cream, then you must not have very much respect for the police.

I think we can only conclude one thing: The goal of many on the left is to have a situation where if you are visiting this country illegally, you shouldn't be mandated to carry or show identification. When I visit other countries, I always have one of two things on my person: My passport, or a copy of my passport. This makes sense. If the French police were to ever stop me, I would have to show them my documentation. This is how the world works. I simply cannot fathom why visitors in Arizona shouldn't be forced to carry or show their documentation when they are stopped for speeding. I have to.

Again, I think the only logical conclusion is that Mr. Pochoda and the ACLU truly believe that if you are an illegal immigrant, you should never be forced to show your documentation to authorities. My only question to the Arizona ACLU and other organizations is, why not?