Search
Archives

You are currently browsing the archives for the Claire McCaskill category.

Categories

Archive for the ‘Claire McCaskill’ Category

According to this article, House Democrats unveiled their agenda for the first 100 days of the 116th Congress. According to the article, the “Democratic leader in the House, Nancy Pelosi, promises that the first bill voted on by the new Congress will focus on campaign finance and ethics reforms. According to news accounts, H.R. 1 would, among other things, establish automatic voter registration and “reinvigorate” the Voting Rights Act.”

Further, House Democrats want to overwhelm Republicans by pushing “public financing of congressional campaigns, with a 6-to-1 government match on small dollar donations.” Democrats will certainly define small dollar donations to their advantage.

The reason they’ll do that is because, according to Tucker Carlson’s op-ed, when “a Republican wins an election, it’s fine to question the legitimacy of the process. Democrats have been doing since the days Trump was elected two years ago. That’s patriotic. It’s your duty. But when the Democratic Party’s power is at stake, raising questions about the process is wrong. Indeed it’s nothing less than the road to dictatorship.”

It’s worse than that. Here’s Howard Dean talking about this topic:

In other words, in 2018, Dean vehemently insisted that the nation was in a fight of “good vs. evil” while being convinced that “we’re the good” and that Republicans were the evil. That’s literally what he said a couple weeks ago. That isn’t the first time he’s made that statement. When he was DNC Chair in 2005, he said this:

And concluding his backyard speech with a litany of Democratic values, he added: “This is a struggle of good and evil. And we’re the good.”

Think about that a second. In 2005, Howard Dean thought that George W. Bush was a hardcore conservative who was a religious extremist. Now, he’s insisting that President Trump is an extremist who thinks that the US-Mexican border should be protected.

What’s funny is that Democrats think that’s immoral. That puts the Democrats on the opposite side of the Founding Fathers. In Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 of the Constitution, Congress is authorized to “establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.” It doesn’t say that Mexicans and Central Americans will “establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” in consultation with Congress.

BTW, Democrats insist that the mobile mob making its way through Mexico isn’t an invasion. Here’s the official definition of invasion:

entrance as if to take possession or overrun:
infringement by intrusion.

CNN and Jim Acosta need better dictionaries. More importantly, Democrats need to start telling the whole truth more often:

Gun control was not a big issue in the midterm campaign, despite promises by gun control advocates to make it a centerpiece of the elections in the wake of the Parkland, Fla., school shooting. The issue “evaporated during the final weeks of the election in all but very safe liberal districts,” noted Paul Bedard of the Washington Examiner. “But now that the Democrats have won the House,” Bedard notes, “leaders feel emboldened to raise calls for expanded background checks and an assault weapon ban.”

Gun control advocates tout the fact that 15 House Republicans with “A” ratings from the NRA lost their elections. But gun control advocates lost seats in the Senate. That includes Joseph Donnelly, who lost his bid in Indiana. Pro-gun rights Josh Hawley unseated Claire McCaskill in Missouri. According to the NRA, candidates backed by gun rights group won 106 races, and lost 33 despite being outspent by gun control supporters. This was not the groundswell of support for gun control laws that advocates promised.

These items might gather majority support in polls but they don’t excite people. If Democrats pass tax increases in the House and the economy falters after that, they’ll rightly get blamed. If the Democrats focus on investigations, gun control and campaign finance reform instead of focusing on keeping the economy going strong, they’ll deserve the blame they’ll get.

Let’s be clear about something. The question as to whether Sen. Schumer or Sen. McConnell will be the majority leader is over. Sen. McConnell will be the Senate Majority Leader this January. The only question is how big his majority will be. At this point, I’m betting that he’ll have at least 54 Republicans in his majority.

Each day, I check the RealClearPolitics scorecard in the upper right hand corner of the page. A month ago, Josh Hawley, (R-MO), was the only Republican leading Claire McCaskill, his Democrat opponent. Last week, Republicans leading their Democrat opponents numbered 6: Ted Cruz leading Comrade O’Rourke in Texas, Martha McSally leading Kirsten Sinema in Arizona, Dean Heller leading Jackie Rosen in Nevada, Marsha Blackburn leading Phil Bredesen in Tennessee and Kevin Cramer leading Heidi Heitkamp in North Dakota. Yesterday, Bill Nelson, (D-FL), led Rick Scott. Then he made the asinine mistake of accusing Gov. Scott of using Hurricane Michael for his political advantage. Today, that race is tied. I expect Gov. Scott to win that race. People don’t vote for whiners.

The Beto O’Rourke myth is essentially over, thanks in large part to their last debate:

Sen. Cruz stung O’Rourke when he said that O’Rourke wouldn’t have voted for either Neil Gorsuch or Brett Kavanaugh, then saying that he “led the fight” to confirm those judges to the Supreme Court.

Don’t be surprised if the Senate map gets better for Republicans in the final days. (Think Montana and Minnesota.)

Nostradamus isn’t required to find out what will happen in 2019 if the Democrats get control of the House and/or the Senate. The policies that Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and other Democrat Socialists will destroy the positives that President Trump and the GOP have put in place.

I’ll stipulate that Republicans like John McCain, Jeff Flake and Susan Collins haven’t been a great help to President Trump’s agenda. With that said, there’s no disputing that replacing McCain with Jon Kyl, Flake with Martha McSally, Bob Corker with Marsha Blackburn, then replacing Joe Manchin, Joe Donnelly, Jon Tester, Heidi Heitkamp and Claire McCaskill with solid conservatives would be a major step in the right direction.

We’ve seen what happens when environmental activists and socialists get their way. You get a lost decade like we had under Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, then Barack Obama. Companies left the US. Income inequality increased. Economic growth stagnated. Is that the future you want?

Fast forward to January, 2017. President Trump took over. With the help of the Republican Congress, President Trump rolled back billions of dollars of anti-coal and anti-mining regulations that the Democrats had installed. Though Sen. McCain sunk our attempt to repeal and replace the ACA, President Trump and the Republicans revamped the tax code, unleashing the animal spirits of an economy stalled for too long.

The result? Small business and consumer confidence soaring. Capital investment increasing for the first time in years. In other non-economic areas, we’re confirming solid judges that think it’s a sin to act like legislators but who see interpreting the Constitution as their primary function.

This past week, Democrats showed that they’re only interested in obstructing everything that President Trump stands for. Will Republicans fight with President Trump? Or will we let evil triumph? As for myself, I plan on fighting until I drop.

Republicans, it’s time to get fired up and kick some electoral ass.

After President Trump tweeted that he’s willing to shut down the government over funding for his border wall, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said that he’s optimistic they “can avoid a government shutdown.” A senior Republican aide said “We’ve got the whole month of August dedicated to appropriations. This notion that we’re going to shut down the government — everyone needs to dial down the panic button a couple notches.”

That leads me to this question: will Republicans finish the major funding bills on time, then force Democrats to either vote for funding the wall or shutting the government down? The truth is that Republicans might paint the Democrats into a corner by passing the vast majority of appropriations bills on time. The NDAA is heading to President Trump’s desk, which funds the military. Since Congress is passing individual appropriations bills rather than a CR that funds the entire government, the MSM and the Democrats (pardon the repetition) will find it virtually impossible to succeed in accusing Republicans of shutting down government.

Further, the part of the government that is actually shut down is the Department of Homeland Security. Do Democrats really want to tell swing-district voters that they don’t want to build the wall? That might work in some of the most liberal districts but it can’t help them in the Rust Belt, the Midwest or Great Lakes states where they’re fighting to recapture governorships and/or hold onto precarious Senate seats. Further, if Democrats vote against funding the wall, won’t that essentially kill their opportunity to flip the Arizona and Nevada Senate seats?

“We’ll finish up the set of appropriations measures we’ve been considering for several days and take four more big steps toward our goal of completing a regular appropriations process and funding the government in a timely and orderly manner,” McConnell said on the Senate floor.

President Obama loved getting Republicans into an all-or-nothing position because he had the biggest megaphone. Republicans now have that super-sized megaphone. It’s worth noting that President Trump is on the right side of the border wall issue. Whether Republicans realize it or not, most Rust Belt/Corn Belt states prefer keeping the gangs, drug cartels and human traffickers out of their states.

If Democrats want to bet that they’re on the right side of that issue, let ’em try. Ultimately, I’m betting that there’s more people who want to stop MS-13 and keep the economy running strong than there are people who prefer open borders, rampant crime and a return to the Obama economy.

If Republicans can campaign on getting their appropriations done on time, that will tell voters that, despite a bumpy start, Republicans are getting the nation’s work done on time. That’s a net positive for both the House and Senate. Couple that with the Senate confirming another Supreme Court justice and the House getting started on Tax Cuts 2.0 and you’ve got a pretty nice list of accomplishments to run on.

If funding the wall is the only thing left on the agenda, that’d put Democrats in a sticky position. That’s a position red state Democrat senators don’t want to find themselves in.

When then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid decided to abolish the filibuster on judicial nominees and presidential appointments in 2013, people told him that his tactic would have adverse affects in years to come. Chief among those critics was Mitch McConnell, the current Senate Majority Leader.

Last year, Democrat special interest organizations ordered Democrats to filibuster the nomination of Neil Gorsuch, President Trump’s pick to replace the late Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court. When Democrats complied, Sen. McConnell predictably replied by dropping the nuclear option on the Democrats. This summer, when Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement, those same Democrat special interest organizations have ordered Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to keep all Democrats together in voting against President Trump’s nominee to replace Justice Kennedy. (Apparently, the idiots who ordered the first mistake haven’t learned that it’s foolish to double down on that mistake.)

This article highlights just how foolish Democrats are. Because these special interest organizations insisted on resisting President Trump the last time, they don’t have a chance this time. It must’ve killed Carl Hulse to write this:

The actions of a handful of Senate Democrats struggling to hold their seats in red states where Mr. Trump remains popular — notably Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, Joe Donnelly of Indiana and Joe Manchin III of West Virginia — will have broad implications for the party at a critical political juncture.

That’s just the start of the list. After this week, you’d better add Jon Tester, Claire McCaskill and Bill Nelson to the list, too. If Tim Kaine votes against President Trump’s latest nominee, it’ll be difficult for him to defend himself because he will have voted against both of President Trump’s Supreme Court nominees.

That’s what happens when politicians listen to lunatics like this activist:

Republicans should thank Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell and President Trump for the difficult position Democrats are in right now.

This article introduces a frightening thought to Republicans — “the Maxine Waters brigade.” Actually, conservatives should be happy for such a phenomenon.

This paragraph should explain why. In it, it talks about “Even before the prospect of a conservative SCOTUS majority, progressives were already chasing Republicans out of restaurants. Now that Roe v. Wade is theoretically at risk, what will the Maxine Waters brigade do now—start throwing them out of airplanes?”

As I highlighted in this earlier post, Democrats are losing it. Watch 15 seconds of the videos of Jeffrey Toobin and Chris Matthews losing it and you’ll know what I mean. To use an old cliche, a little paranoia goes a long way. This week especially, Democrats are living proof of that cliche.

Here’s a bigger problem for Democrats:

Yes, that’s turned around a bit in the Trump era, most notably in Alabama where a solidly red seat flipped to blue. But unfortunately for Democrats there are only so many Judge Roy Moore’s to go around. What’s happening this November is that Democrats like Joe Manchin (WV), Joe Donnelly (IN), Heidi Heitkamp (ND), and Claire McCaskill (MO) have to run against quality, non-crazy Republicans in states that Trump carried by double-digits.

And now, thanks to Justice Kennedy’s retirement, those same Democrats have to vote against a conservative Supreme Court nominee…on the eve of an election. It’s like a felon robbing a bank on his way to a parole hearing—it confirms everything they feared about you to begin with.

For people who understand things the game of Cribbage, they know that a hand with all even cards is close to worthless. The old saying is that the only right way to throw such a hand is away. Democrats are looking at the political equivalent of an all even cards Cribbage hand this year.

Think about this: Joe Crowley had hoped to challenge Nancy Pelosi to be Speaker of the House. He was defeated by a socialist who wants to abolish ICE. She’ll win that election but New York Republicans should drape her around the necks of every so-called moderate in New York. I can’t picture that turning out well for Democrats.

Think about this, too. How many voters think that getting rid of ICE is the pathway to a safer, more prosperous America? A: Virtually no one. When closing arguments are made this October and November, expect this to be part of the Republicans’ closing arguments.

Don’t expect the Maxine Waters Brigade to win that fight.

Apparently, the writer that wrote this article doesn’t believe in researching articles. Earlier this morning, I saw this article about the Democrats’ shrinking, virtually nonexistent, lead in the generic ballot question. According to the poll, the enthusiasm gap has virtually disappeared, too. But I digress.

The second paragraph in the Politico article says “It may be the cruelest irony of the Trump era. During an election season when the House seems to be a lost cause for Republicans and nearly every indicator suggests massive Democratic gains in November, the outlook for wresting the Senate away from the GOP remains grim.”

Based on generic ballot polling from last September, a blue wave looked possible, though that was a stretch, too. After the latest CNN poll, a blue wave in the House looks impossible. BTW, has anyone heard of a wave election where one party wins a ton of seats in the House but loses a bunch of seats in the Senate? Wave elections happen when the electorate gets into a ‘throw the bums out’ mindset. That’s when the right track-wrong track number is underwater.

This is wishful thinking:

Tester isn’t without his own showman’s instincts: Days after the president attacked him, the farmer-turned-senator appeared above-the-fold on newspaper front pages across his home state, photographed in a tractor cab as he prepared to put seed in the ground.

It’s better than curling up into the fetal position but hopping on a tractor won’t save Tester’s behind. Tester sabotaged a cabinet nominee with gossip and unverified information. He also voted against President Trump’s tax cuts. If those things don’t sink Sen. Tester, then he’s virtually invincible. I’m certain he isn’t invincible.

Now that 2018 shows signs of being the next Democratic wave year, it’s possible that once again Tester’s boat—and McCaskill’s, and Manchin’s, and all the rest—will be lifted. After all, in four of the five instances when the House changed control since World War II, the Senate has flipped along with it.

But there are crucial differences this year. Perhaps the biggest is that Trump has signaled his intent to leverage his popularity against Democratic Senate incumbents in the states where his approval ratings are strongest. His presidential travel schedule has closely overlapped the roster of states he carried in 2016. Trump could decide to try to zero in on Tester or another red-state Democrat with a disparaging nickname and a barrage of October tweets.

McCaskill recently fell behind in Missouri, which is hardly proof that there’s a rising tide lifting Democrats’ ships. Further, ignoring the races that are building in Ohio, Minnesota, Florida and Wisconsin is pretty foolish.

Rick Scott leads Democrat incumbent Bill Nelson by 4 points (44%-40%) and he can self-fund. Why this race wasn’t included in Politico’s article is inexplicable. Further, Scott is the popular governor of Florida, which means he’s both popular and has 100% name recognition in the state.

Call me crazy but I think it’s possible that this hit piece isn’t sloppy journalism. It isn’t a stretch to think it’s intentionally inaccurate.

Julie Kelly’s article for the Federalist demolishes the Democrats’ chanting point that it’s a matter of when, not if, Democrats retake the US House of Representatives.

Digging into recent polling reveals some glaring weaknesses for Democrats. These aren’t insignificant weaknesses. They’re game-changing weaknesses. For instance, Kelly reports that “there is no ‘enthusiasm gap’ for Democrats. In fact, Republicans now seem more motivated to vote in November: 86 percent of Republicans say they are absolutely or certain to vote this fall, compared to 81 percent of Democrats.”

That’s the first time I’ve read that this cycle. If that holds, Democrats won’t retake the House. On the Senate side, that might indicate a red wave of historic proportions. Prior to this, I’ve been predicting Republicans gaining 4-5 seats net in the Senate. If the enthusiasm gap disappears, Republicans might have a big red wave staring at them. Instead of just flipping seats in West Virginia, Missouri, North Dakota, Indiana and Montana, the GOP might flip Florida, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, too.

The bad news for Democrats continues:

While white college graduates favor Democrats by nine points, non-college whites prefer a Republican congressional candidate by nearly 30 points, devastating news about a core constituency of the Democratic Party going forward.

This sums my thoughts up precisely:

A slim majority also said gun violence has no effect on whether they will vote Republican or Democrat. So it looks like the nonstop media exploitation of the Parkland school shooting did not work for the Left.

I don’t see a wave, be it blue or red. There just isn’t an appetite for a major change. The economy is getting stronger, which usually leads to not rocking the boat at the voting booth.

When asked which Democrats in red states are in trouble, most political junkies will rattle off the names of Joe Manchin, Heidi Heitkamp, Claire McCaskill and Joe Donnelly. I’m not here to question any of those names. I’m here to remind people that this list isn’t comprehensive. This article reminds people that Tammy Baldwin has ‘earned’ a spot on that list, too.

As I’ve said in the past, the Marquette University poll is the gold standard in Wisconsin, just like the Des Moines Register poll is the gold standard in Iowa. If you want the low-down on the state of the races in Wisconsin, the Marquette poll is the most accurate.

According to the latest Marquette University poll , “a recent Marquette Law School poll of registered voters found Baldwin’s favorability rating dipped three points over the past year, from 40 to 37 percent, while her unfavorability rating climbed from 35 to 39 percent.” Simply put, incumbents with approval ratings under 40% rarely win re-election. That’s because people already know them. There’s little they can do to change people’s opinions, too.

That isn’t Sen. Baldwin’s opinion, though:

Baldwin responded to a question about her low popularity by asserting, “We’re a terribly polarized state, which I hate. When I started in political life running for office, people were ticket-splitters. There wasn’t the partisan polarization that we see,” claimed Baldwin.

Sen. Baldwin’s ticket-splitting statement starts about 3:30 into this video:

Twenty years ago, the Democratic Party hadn’t gone off the rails. People could consider splitting tickets. Now that Democrats are lunatic demagogues, nobody thinks about ticket-splitting. Sen. Baldwin faces a tough re-election campaign.

The Common Sense Coalition’s amendment is pretty much a bait-and-switch con job piece of legislation. For starters, amnesty for DACA recipients is immediate. That isn’t surprising. Next, building President Trump’s wall isn’t a priority. On Pg. 51 of the amendment, we learn that $1,571,000,000,000 is appropriated to build President Trump’s wall in 2018. Further, $2,500,000,000,000 is available to be appropriated in each year starting in 2019 and going through 2027. Further, the legislative language states that “the amount specified in subsection (d) for each of fiscal years 2019-2027 shall not be available for such fiscal year unless (A) the Secretary submits to Congress, not later than 60 days before the start of such fiscal year a report setting forth a description of every planned expenditure…, (B) a description of the total number of miles of security fencing… etc.

In other words, they’re limiting the speed with which the wall can be built. Further. they’re making it possible for future Democratic administrations to kill the building of the wall.

Simply put, this bill has no chance of getting 6o votes. It doesn’t stand a chance of getting signed into law, either. Here’s a picture of most of the members of the Common Sense Coalition:

It’s worth noting that a significant percentage of these senators are either retiring or will be defeated this fall. Sen. Donnelly fits that description. Jeff Flake definitely fits that description. Joe Manchin is inching closer to fitting that description. Heidi Heitkamp definitely fits that description. Claire McCaskill and Bill Nelson fit that description. The senators from New Hampshire don’t exactly fit the description but they’re getting there. Bob Corker fits that description.

Simply put, most of the senators in the Common Sense Coalition won’t be in the Senate a year from now. That doesn’t mean they don’t have the right to vote. That’s their right until their replacement is sworn in, either after their retirement or their defeat. What it means, though, is that members of the Coalition don’t care about national security. They certainly aren’t interested in listening to the people. Thus far, they haven’t listened to the people.

This coalition isn’t made up of principled politicians. It’s made up of elitists who aren’t interested in listening to the people. Chuck Grassley is the senior senator from Iowa. He isn’t part of that Coalition. He’s just a politician who’s interested in doing the right thing, both for DACA recipients and for national security. He’s the chief author of a bill that’s been endorsed by President Trump. It’s the only bill that the Senate will debate that President Trump will sign or should sign. Listen to Sen. Grassley’s speech explaining why senators should vote for his legislation:

The text of Sen. Grassley’s bill, known as the Secure and Succeed Act, is significantly different than the CSC’s legislation. The biggest difference between the 2 bills is that the Grassley bill appropriates the money for the wall right away. In the section titled “Subtitle C—Border Security Enforcement Fund” the following appropriations are made:

The Secretary shall transfer, 8 from the Fund to the “U.S. Customs and Border 9 Protection—Procurement, Construction and Improvements” account, for the purpose described in 11 subsection (a)(1), $18,000,000,000, of which— 12 (A) $1,571,000,000 shall be transferred in 13 fiscal year 2018; 14 (B) $1,600,000,000 shall be transferred in fiscal year 2019; 16 (C) $1,842,000,000 shall be transferred in fiscal year 2020; (D) $2,019,000,000 shall be transferred in 19 fiscal year 2021; (E) $2,237,000,000 shall be transferred in fiscal year 2022; (F) $1,745,000,000 shall be transferred in fiscal year 2023; 177 (G) $1,746,000,000 shall be transferred in fiscal year 2024; (H) $1,776,000,000 shall be transferred in fiscal year 2025; (I) $1,746,000,000 shall be transferred in fiscal year 2026; and (J) $1,718,000,000 shall be transferred in fiscal year 2027.

Barring an act of Congress, the money for President Trump’s wall will be appropriated this year.

The Common Sense Coalition’s bill appropriates approximately $1,700,000,000,000 this year, then requires separate appropriations in the years following to build the wall. The Grassley bill appropriates the money immediately.

It’s worth noting that Democrats have the proverbial gun pointed at their heads. If Democrats don’t agree to President Trump’s conditions, DACA collapses and the recipients hold Democrats responsible. Remember this?

The chances for a repeat of that scene is high if Democrats don’t deliver.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,